College Biz WTF? Under Armour tells UCLA it wants to end deal with school, UCLA says NOT SO FAST!

playahaitian

Rising Star
Certified Pussy Poster

Under Armour tells UCLA it wants to end deal with school
UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero, left, and Under Armour’s Kevin Plank with a UCLA jersey following a meeting where they officially announced the UCLA and Under Armour agreement in 2016.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
By BEN BOLCHSTAFF WRITER
JUNE 27, 2020
9:23 AM

UPDATED5:05 PM
Under Armour has informed UCLA that it wants to terminate the record-setting $280-million deal the apparel giant signed with the school in 2016, a potential financial blow that the Bruins intend to fight.

The company said in a statement Saturday that it wanted to end the partnership because of UCLA’s inability to provide unspecified marketing benefits as required by the contract between the parties.

“Under Armour has recently made the difficult decision to discontinue our partnership with UCLA, as we have been paying for marketing benefits that we have not received for an extended time period,” the company said in a statement supplied to The Los Angeles Times. “The agreement allows us to terminate in such an event and we are exercising that right.”

UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero, whose 18-year tenure at the school is set to end this week, appeared to contest Under Armour’s ability to unilaterally dissolve its agreement with the school in a letter he sent to Bruins constituents.

“We are exploring all of our options to resist Under Armour’s actions and will share more information as we can,” Guerrero wrote. “We want to reassure you that UCLA Athletics remains committed to providing our hard-working staff and student-athletes with the footwear, apparel and equipment needed to train and compete at the highest level.”

SPORTS
This day in sports: UCLA wins its first College World Series title
June 25, 2020

Any loss of revenue would be doubly devastating to a UCLA athletic department already facing a massive budget deficit even before the COVID-19 pandemic led to the cancellation of spring sports and endangered the fall sports calendar. The department took on an interest-bearing loan from the university to cover an $18.9-million shortfall for the 2019 fiscal year and is expected to go further into the red in 2020.
There are strong incentives for both Under Armour and UCLA to reach an amicable settlement.


“If you’re Under Armour, you have to handle this properly because you’re still heavily invested — literally and figuratively — throughout the sports landscape and you don’t want to be in a position where you’re perceived to be playing hardball with one of your highest-profile clients,” said David Carter, a sports business expert and professor at the USC Marshall School of Business.

“On the flip side of that, if you’re UCLA, you also have to be concerned because you need to continue many, many years after this to negotiate future sponsorship deals whether they’re with apparel manufacturers or beverage companies or financial services, so it’s really delicate for both sides that they find a solution.”
Should UCLA and Under Armour part ways, the school would seek a new apparel deal, presumably with one of the other major players in sportswear. UCLA had fielded offers from Nike and Adidas before picking Under Armour four years ago.

UCLA-Under Armour agreement
June 27, 2020

Under Armour currently possesses the second-strongest foothold in the Pac-12 Conference among athletic apparel companies, holding deals with California and Utah in addition to UCLA. Nike holds deals with seven schools — including USC — while Adidas partners with Washington and Arizona State.

Matt Barnes, a former Bruins forward who spent 14 seasons in the NBA, suggested on social media that the apparent end of the partnership between his alma mater and Under Armour might benefit UCLA. The company has already scrubbed all mentions of Bruins merchandise from its website.

“This could b a blessing n disguise,” Barnes tweeted. “Although losing that $ will hurt, UA gear is trash! In talking 2 these young athletes they wanna go2 a school that can prepare them 4 the next level & get dope gear in the process. I personally feel the @UCLA UA deal has hindered their recruiting.”

Carter said the pandemic could complicate UCLA’s efforts to find a comparable replacement deal, forcing potential suitors to implement staggered payouts and clauses based on attendance benchmarks and apparel sales. Then again, the Bruins still possess one of the most powerful brands in college sports.

“UCLA’s in a big market, their athletic heritage is among the strongest in the country,” Carter said, “and those two things aren’t going to change.”
UCLA SPORTS
UCLA athletes set to voluntarily return to campus on unfamiliar terms
June 20, 2020

Under Armour agreed to a 15-year contract with UCLA in 2016 that was the richest shoe and apparel sponsorship in college sports history, replacing a deal the Bruins previously held with Adidas that expired in the summer of 2017. The deal gave Under Armour a flagship program on the West Coast while providing UCLA with a massive infusion of cash and athletic apparel.

As part of the agreement, Under Armour paid UCLA $15 million up front in addition to roughly $11 million per year in rights and marketing fees. The apparel company also agreed to supply the school with an average of $7.4 million in clothing, shoes and equipment each school year while contributing $2 million over an eight-year span toward athletic facility upgrades.

Under Armour hasn’t received the expected return on investment given UCLA’s recent struggles in its marquee sports. While UCLA’s Olympic sports programs such as gymnastics and softball have won national championships in recent years, the football team has posted losing records in four consecutive seasons and the men’s basketball team last made the NCAA tournament in 2018.

New UCLA athletic director Martin Jarmond is familiar with Under Armour, having worked with the apparel company as part of its sponsorship of Boston College’s athletic teams when he was the Eagles athletic director. Jarmond teamed with the company to produce the Martin Jarmond Collection of Boston College-themed sportswear.

Like many other companies struggling amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Under Armour’s financial outlook is increasingly bleak. Wall Street analysts project the company’s sales for the current fiscal quarter to be down 53.8% from the same period last year, according to American Banking and Market News. Shares of Under Armour stock opened at $9.11 on Friday, well below its 12-month high of $27.72
 
Under Armour: Cutting The Fat
Jul. 6, 2020 6:24 AM ET
|
12 comments


|
About: Under Armour, Inc. (UA), UAA
Stone Fox Capital
DIY Value Investing
Receive quick and valuable DIY tips on maximizing risk-adjusted returns

(28,318 followers)
Summary
Under Armour moves to terminate costly marketing deals with UCLA and potentially Cal.
The college deals cost over $20 million annually with limited benefit.
The stock remains a solid buy near the recent double bottom at $8.
This idea was discussed in more depth with members of my private investing community, DIY Value Investing. Get started today »
The last few months have been full of sports cancellations, especially at the collegiate level. While professional sports have looked to restart paused leagues, most college events were cancelled with some discussion of continuing the cancellations into the fall college football season.
Up until recently, the financial impact wasn't fully considered with most TV contracts and sponsorship deals left untouched with the resumption of play plans. Under Armour (UA, UAA) fired the first major shot canceling over-priced sponsorship deals for college sports. The athletic apparel retailer cutting the fat is a bullish sign on the beaten-down stock.
Image Source: UCLA website
Cutting Off UCLA
At the time in 2016, the Under Armour deal for the marketing rights at UCLA was a record-breaking one. UA signed a 15-year, $280 million deal for those rights at the Pac 12 with an average cost of $18.7 million per year.
Including a big deal with California, Under Armour agreed to spend an incredible $336 million on these two programs alone averaging $27.3 million per year through 2026. The UCLA deal runs another five years.
These big deals came at the tail end of a string of massive collegiate apparel agreements. The deals reset the market for NCAA's large programs and included big deals for Ohio State (Nike (NYSE:NKE)), Texas (Nike), Michigan (Nike) and Notre Dame (Under Armour).

These big deals in the 2016 time frame of the UCLA contract still top the list of the most expensive contracts. At the end of 2019, Forbes listed these as the most valuable NCAA sports apparel deals:
  1. UCLA, UA, $12.76M
  2. Louisville, adidas (OTCQX:ADDYY), $10.66M
  3. Texas, Nike, $9.76M
  4. Kansas, adidas, $8.8M
  5. Michigan, Nike/Jordan, $7.79M
  6. Washington, adidas, $7.57M
  7. Nebraska, adidas, $7.52M
  8. Ohio State, Nike, $6.85M
  9. Wisconsin, UA, $6.8M
  10. Auburn, UA, $5.86M
Most of the deals included bonuses such as $15 million in the case of the UCLA deal. Those costs aren't included in these annual costs, so the amounts don't add up to the full cost of the contract.
So not only is the UCLA deal still the most costly apparel deal nearly four years later, but also the school doesn't even rank in the Top 25 most valuable football teams. While the school is a men's basketball powerhouse and dominant in other smaller sports, the lack of success in football undermines the value of a marketing contract as the school doesn't regularly appear in national games anymore.
With no college sports taking place and the deal remaining the most costly in college sports, naturally Under Armour wants to terminate the costly marketing spend. In addition, the UCLA and Cal contracts apparently include force majeure clauses that allow for cancellation of the apparel contracts unlike typical deals. Apparently, the athletic apparel company knew at the time the deals were so costly that the company needed some protection.
 
The contract lists don't include the Notre Dame deal since it isn't a public school with disclosed contracts. The Irish are probably the only private school with the clout to appear on these top apparel contract lists.

Beyond just the financials, one of the big problems facing Under Armour is that the California schools appear less interested in playing football in the fall. The SEC schools of Auburn and South Carolina appear full speed ahead, so the ability to generate any value from UCLA and California could be vastly limited in the fall.


Lowering Expenses
As mentioned in some of the linked articles, Under Armour doesn't appear interested in cutting all of the deals. The UCLA deal stands out in annual expenses and limited benefits without a Top 25 football program. Not to mention, consumers aren't likely to buy athletic apparel from the brand that sponsors their college football program. If one doesn't like Nike because they were too supportive of Kaepernick or Under Armour because founder Chris Plank appeared too close to Trump, the connection to a college football or basketball team isn't going to matter.

The lowered revenue picture due to COVID-19 doesn't help while one has to even question if the market spend on universities actually drives meaningful revenues. At 46% gross margins, Under Armour would need the UCLA deal to deliver over $40 million in annual revenues to cover the costs of the partnership.

The deal clearly never made economic sense and using any possible way to cancel the deal is wise, especially since California schools appear less certain to return to sports this year. In 2019, UA spent $2.2 billion on its SG&A expenses and only generated operating income of $237 million. Cutting these deals removes some $20 million from ongoing annual costs, but more importantly the company ends some inefficient deals that should improve the profit picture.

Again, eliminating these deals aren't just about scraping $20 million in costs because the downside could be lost revenues. The net benefit is clearly a reduction of expenses, improving margins and a return to focusing on making performance apparel with a purpose of not just slapping the logo on a UCLA or Cal t-shirt.

Under Armour still has to figure out the revenue picture. The company was already in the middle of a turnaround prior to the COVID-19 shutdown.

The stock has made a nice double bottom around $8 providing plenty of upside on any rebound in sales. UAA traded above $20 before the virus crisis killed any momentum in the stock.



Takeaway
The key investor takeaway is saving $20 million annually on marketing deals with college programs should contribute to improving the bottom line. Under Armour continues to make moves to position the company for selling performance athletic apparel and away from slapping logos on gear offering limited value. The stock remains a buy here near the recent double bottom at $8.
 
If the greedy lil bitches spent half of that contract on the kids risking it all for their profit and our entertainment...i might consider becoming a fan again..

ncaa-slavery.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top