Stadium naming rights deal with Valley Children’s does little to heal Fresno State
Gotta hand it to Fresno State administrators. They sure know how to turn $1 million into $450,000. Then turn $1 million into $395,000. Then even less.
When Fresno State and Valley Children’s Hospital announced a 10-year, $10 million naming rights agreement for Bulldogs Stadium, it was a mild surprise. Why would anyone pay that kind of money to put its name on a facility that … oh, let’s be kind … is in desperate need of renovations? What a coup for the Bulldogs.
A closer examination by The Bee’s Robert Kuwada pulled the covers back on what seemed like such a sweet deal. Fresno State’s deal with Valley Children’s Hospital mandated such a high degree of exclusivity that the university had to rework its contract with Learfield/Bulldog Sports Properties and will receive less money from its multimedia rights partner.
How much less? In 2021-22, the first year of the five-year deal with Learfield, $550,000 less than the original agreement. Then $605,000 less in 2022-23, $665,500 less in 2023-24, $815,500 less in 2024-25 and, finally, $965,000 less in 2025-26.
Now that everything has come out of the wash, this doesn’t look like a very good deal for the university. With this level of money management skill on display, little wonder our tax dollars are wanted/needed.
Opinion
Fresno State would dispute those statements, certainly. Kuwada quoted a university spokesperson who emphasized the “extremely important partnership” with Valley Children’s while noting athletics would receive an additional $1 million in operational support from the university in 2022-23.
Which is great. But guess I need to be the guy to point out the Bulldogs wouldn’t need that additional $1 million in university support (or at least $605,000 in 2022-23) if not for the Valley Children’s deal that forced the diminished contract with Learfield.
These aren’t dollar-for-dollar swaps, it should be noted. Still, the cause and effect created a deficit in a revenue stream crucial to the athletic department’s operations. Compelling the university to either bail out athletics or allow them to suffer.
When any stadium naming rights deal is negotiated, some degree of exclusivity is expected. For example, you’re not going to go to Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara and see a bunch of advertisements for Old Navy. Or to Albertson’s Stadium in Boise and see SaveMart logos all over the place.
Fresno State gives away the farm
But Fresno State’s deal with Valley Children’s Hospital extends far beyond that. It covers the Save Mart Center, Pete Beiden Field at Bob Bennett Stadium, Margie Wright Diamond, the soccer stadium and any other existing or future Bulldogs athletics site. And not just to who can advertise inside the venue, but whose logos can be displayed in any public-facing manner. Including tailgating areas.
The agreement includes not just Valley Children’s competitors in the healthcare field — which is arguable, considering it is the region’s sole children’s hospital — but also to dentist’s offices, senior living centers, even insurance and pharmaceutical companies.
Talking about giving away the advertising and sponsorship farm. Almost makes you wonder if Fresno State administrators understood all the ramifications — or were simply dazzled by the $10 million and chance to partner with a popular brand name.
It must be noted the Valley Children’s agreement was negotiated and agreed upon by the uppermost levels of Fresno State’s administration, including university President Saúl Jiménez-Sandoval and Chief Financial Officer Debbie Adishian-Astone. (In other words, don’t blame Athletics Director Terry Tumey.)
Remember how Jiménez-Sandoval said the Valley Children’s deal helps the Bulldogs “get to dry land” fiscally? Nope. Still stuck in the mud.
Throughout my years of paying attention to Fresno State sports, one constant theme has been that whenever presidents and CFOs meddle too deeply into the athletic department’s affairs, the results are quite often messy.
I’m sure those administrators and their spokespeople would dispute that. But they’re the ones who turned $1 million into $450,000.
