Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

I'm not in favor of tobacco, at any age.

But the alcohol thing - Given the problems with underage and binge drinking by people, I think FIRST students could be a positive influence as role models by not partaking of alcohol when they are underage and becoming responsible if they choose to partake when they become adults.

Culture has been changed regarding tobacco.

Culture is changing regarding science, technology and engineering.

Culture needs to be and could change regarding alcohol.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

the problem with using child labor is most times it is legally done. It is not illegal by U.S. law to have products made elsewhere. Wherever elsewhere is, it is usually legal to use children for labor AND pay them low wages.

that is why child labor is so hard to fight. We can't prosecute U.S. companies for their counterparts in other countries, and we can't really get those countries to outlaw child labor.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

When Rentschler Field opened in East Hartford, RAGE was given the opportunity to fundraise by working concession stands. We have been working at their beer concession stands for most every UConn football game, World cup game and concert since then. The team earns a good portion of our fundraising this way.
As soon as the team started doing this, we set up a few rules to determine who can work the concessions. First, students are not allowed to work them, only parents and adult mentors. Second, you must be over 21 to work.
As long as the money has no strings, I have no issue with where it comes from. I also wouldn't mind seeing robots with brewery sponsors on them. After all, how many kids do you see wearing a #8 Budweiser hat or shirt? I bet more kids watch Nascar than FIRST.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

I find it somewhat ironic that, while reading this thread, I see a "Coors 21 means 21" commercial, stating that teens are half as likely to drink if they have at least 5 caring adults whom they come into contact with regularly. 5 caring adults...FIRST mentors, maybe?

I just wanted to add my $0.02 after seeing that commercial. If a company such as Coors were to approach me personally to inquire about a sponsorship of my team in particular, I would most definately consider it if they were willing to make the focus of the partnership on the "21 means 21" campaign. So instead of saying "We're sponsored by Coors" we could say "We're sponsored by Coors' '21 means 21' campaign." I personally feel that compromise would help eliminate the negative connotations that may be a concern for a team sponsored by such a company, and it also seems to fall in line very nicely with what Coors appears to be advocating.

In fact, it would make my esteem for Coors go up significantly if they were to sponsor something like FIRST. I always find myself raising my eyebrows at any such prevention program; sponsoring a program like FIRST, with its high incidence of student-adult contact in a high-impact environment, would be, to me, a case of Coors quite literally putting its money where its mouth is.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

If you simplify things down to the 2 key components of FIRST's mission statement, you could probably come to some conclusion like this while avoiding 80-line posts in this thread:

To change the culture of the nation to sci/tech via execution and example, you need major sponsors who have a large hand in being able to both a.) change their own corporate culture and b.) show value in sci/tech. It's really quite simple. FIRST's largest sponsors are (go figure!) the epitome of these two qualities. Usually the "shady" (defined by OP & relevant posts thereafter) companies lack one or the other.

Xerox is a prime example that can be publicly researched -- early 2001-2003 business culture change + their sometimes-unnoticed contributions to the basis of many technologies.

Culture change is best done via execution-style leadership which Dean does every year during the FIRST season -- perhaps his only lacking in this area is that there's nothing to do over the summer & early Fall except that which the teams do themselves. Hence the birth of the Chairman's Award.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

Uugg, apologies to all for the 80 line posts. I get carried away.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

It should be remembered that in some states it is illegal for alcohol or tobacco productions and/or logos to be displayed on school proporties or at school activities.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

Don't sweat it too much. You had something to say that was worth voicing your opinion about. Besides, we're all here to listen to what each other have to say. So no worries! :)

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

Okay, I can live with that. But is changing your team's colors a sign of respect for your sponsor? I can bet that many teams here wouldn't mind changing some colors for a large some of money especially since many alcohol and tobacco have different flavors and stuff with different colored themes that you could choose from.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

I honestly don't think that a good sponsor would expect a team to changes its colors or attach the team brand so closely to the company brand.

It is far more important to the sponsor that the team represents itself well and promotes a good clean positive image and promotes the causes of education and such.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

That's not the point he's making.... Pavan is saying that many teams would be willing to change color for a large sum of money.... I hear far too often about teams that barely squek by; I'm sure they'd love that extra 5-10k (maybe even more) that buys more equipment, better parts, or additional events.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

I think the rest of the point is that there is an alternative to using a logo to recognize a sponsor; if the logo is for some reason offensive, the team can simply use highly recognizable colors from the sponsor to achieve the same recognition. It isn't a case of a sponsor requesting something; it's more a case of a compromise for a questionable logo and eliminating one concern of "questionable" sponsors.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

If you take a quick look at the sponsors here in CD, you will see their logos used in the website.

Sponsor support/partnership is reflected in the team websites, their promotional materials, oftentimes in their giveaways and clothing, and it doesn't stop there.

It is what it is no matter how you color it or change it. That is part of dealing with the marketing/promoting of your partnership with your sponsors and gaining everyone's approval to do so.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

Something that just came to mind.

Activities that Anheuser Busch sponsors that are targeted toward youth programs are typically branded as Anheuser Busch, not Budweiser or any of it's brewing related brands.

Using the A-B logo is a way for them to support the community without the risk of promoting alcohol to youth. Remember they also have the entertainment group (and other groups) and have a lot of familiarity with family oriented events.

I would imagine that many people, especially youth are nowhere as familiar with the A-B eagle as they might be with other A-B corporate symbols.

Re: Should sponsors be held the same standards as teams?
 

Fabulous discussion ... my .02:
1. Local/team/school rules and ordinances often apply and it's pretty clear as to what can and cannot be done.
2. Personally, otherwise, what would guide my decisions would be the "mirror" test. Can I look myself in the eye? Am I promoting the right things to the students and others around my team? Have I compromised my beliefs and values in exchange for sponsorship money?
3. I do find it a very interesting conversation that FIRST might be a context in which teams can help the business to act in a more socially responsible manner as we look toward igniting a broader social change. However, this can be a slippery slope and we all must be highly aware of the projected image we are casting toward our communities - intended or not.