By PATRICK MAROUN

STAFF WRITER

Companies spend years and countless dollars building a reputation for their brands. Having a strong brand is beneficial in a number of different ways: bigger profits, lower costs and the ability to potentially reach more markets.  Ultimately, a stronger brand boils down to market share, and companies will do whatever they can to protect it. But at what point does protecting your brand become counterproductive?  Just ask the National Football League (NFL).

The Super Bowl is the most- watched televised sporting event in the world. For the less economically-inclined (generally I would fall into this group), this means that they have the greatest market share.  As a result, the cost relative to the amount of their viewers is lower, and the amount of profit they are able to produce is greater.

An addendum: This does not mean that it costs less money to host the Super Bowl than any other televised event, but rather that because the cost of hosting the Super Bowl is more or less fixed for each additional viewer, the cost per viewer goes down.  Similarly, the relative popularity of the Super Bowl allows the NFL to charge higher prices to their tenants (ticket holders, advertisers, etc).  In short, greater market share means more money.

Should the NFL not be able to do everything that it can to protect its market share?  Earlier this month the NFL did just that, threatening legal action against college students at Rochester Institute of Technology for infringing on the NFL’s copyright of the title “Super Bowl.”

Students at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) were hosting an event much like the ones that took place in the dorms here at Fordham. They announced it as a “Super Bowl Party” to be held in a field house on campus, showing the game via projectors. Super Bowl parties are a staple in American sports, taking place in our homes around the entire country.  So, why would the NFL threaten to take legal action against students who are not potentially limiting the NFL’s market share but actually serving to bolster it by advertising for their event (and offering free food to cheap college students)?  It makes no sense whatsoever for an organization like the NFL to pursue such aggressive bully tactics to protect a brand that can only be enhanced by the fandom of Americans.

“I think it is important to understand that this is not exactly anything new for the NFL or any other league” avid Philadelphia sports fan Joe Gallagher, FCRH ‘15 said. “They are businesses and have been known for years to do whatever it takes to make money. Fans like to think that it is about them, but in reality it is about the fans only to the extent that the league can dip into the fan’s wallet. Sports leagues have lockouts all the time because of this.“

This is a difficult sentiment for sports fans like myself to come to grips with, despite the fact that we all know it to be true.

“I would say yeah, it is more than a little ridiculous to sue students watching a game for the title. That said, it is the nature of businesses in America, so I wouldn’t call it a shock,” Gallagher said.

By pursuing, or threatening to pursue, such legal action, the NFL hurts its own business interests by potentially alienating some of its viewers.

Outsiders  see them as bullying people who pose no threat to them and are really just fans, limiting the ability of Super Bowl events to increase viewership overall and wasting money on senseless legal fees.

The League should be less focused on protecting its brand and more focused on promoting it.  I understand that it is the nature of a business to turn a profit and protect what it suspects to be its own, but this is just crazy.  A substantial part of brand building is customer service.  We are people, not just consumers.

Patrick Maroun, FCRH ’15, is a theology and political science major from Norwood, Mass.