Business of Esports TV: A $210M Name Change

(Livestream 135)

In this segment, we discuss FTX paying TSM $210M for naming rights, making one of the biggest deals in esports history.

The Business Of Esports brings you news, debates, and all the information you need to know about the gaming sector, the world’s fastest-growing market. With Paul “The Profit” Dawalibi leading the charge, and a variety of special guests, BoE TV is the only place to find insider information on the esports industry!

Check out the full livestream here:

Paul Dawalibi 23:35
This is F TX and TSM commit to largest deal in eSports history. It was like teased at the beginning of like or last week when we you know when we did last week’s live streaming podcast. They finally announced it 210 million British pounds. I think it works up to about $215 million if I’m not mistaken. And that has secured f TX the exclusive naming rights for TSM. So now TSM the esports. org and brand will be known as TSM. f TX. We can talk about if we liked that name at all. But basically, they’re claiming it’s the largest and longest term deal in eSports history. company employees and players are going to receive cryptocurrency because ft x is in the cryptocurrency business. So they’re an exchange And primarily an exchange right cryptocurrency exchange. So their spawn, they bought tsms naming rights. Let me just before we dive into this mentioned also there was another naming rights deal in the same week where Dignitas signed a naming rights deal for their LCS team with quantum pay. And quantum pay, if I’m not mistaken, is also in the at least FinTech slash crypto space. And, and so we’re seeing these teams sell their naming rights. TSM obviously, the big one and the big news. What do you guys think of these deals? First of all, do we like the name is the is that a bunch of fluff? Do we think ft x will ever recoup that investment? I’m just curious general thoughts. Jeff has started

Jeff Cohen 25:47
the hot take. I mean, yeah, I sort of hate these naming rights deals for the esports industry. I mean, it’s it’s great in the sense that they get headlines, they’re big numbers. And, you know, frankly, these teams are struggling or some of them are struggling to make money. So it’s a nice source of revenue but and I think someone William, you may have brought this up many, many podcasts or livestreams ago, like it just as you think about, you know, building a brand as an as a team like you would never see the Green Bay Packers sell. You know, it’d be the Green Bay Packers Coca Cola. Like it’s right. To me. It’s like, it’s like, if our energy renegades like what was? Yeah, like, I don’t know, I just like jersey, you know, make it like NASCAR have the logos everywhere. I don’t care about that. arenas, whatever. To me, it’s like, it shows me that you don’t have other real sources of revenue. And it’s like, you needed to basically sell your firstborn child like, you can you can name my kid like, whatever, I take anything, just give me some money. desperation, I think, unless maybe it’s just you can say, okay, it’s a new paradigm like, blah, blah, blah. You know, eSports is different from traditional sports, we don’t have to follow they’re the same, you know, path fine. But it’s like, this is your brand as a team. Like, you know, Paul, if I came to you with, you know, if some brand came to you and say, rename yourself, not Paul Dawalibi. You’re going to be, you know,

Paul Dawalibi 27:08
slim, Jim Daly VB for 250 million. Call me

Jeff Cohen 27:18
say they’re offering slightly less than that. I just think it’s a little low brow. My that’s my hot take.

Paul Dawalibi 27:24
Reach out to me slim, Jim. I got you don’t worry. 250 million bucks.

William Collis 27:28
Wow. Did he did anyone listen? We have an audio version of it changed his name? No, No, I

Paul Dawalibi 27:35
wouldn’t. Right. You’re right. And it’s a hot take. But I would never sell my name, right? Because there’s a there’s reputation associated with that. And that’s worth more than any amount of money. So we can joke about it. But the reality is, I wouldn’t, and I agree with you completely. Jeff that like, this is their brand. And the weird part is, is that TSM had sort of what I would call a premium brand, right? Like, they’re a team that was all about winning. And like, I would if I saw this out of FaZe clan, I would have been like, kind of get it right. That’s, it’s like they’ll sell themselves for $1 any way they can TSM to me always felt a little more premium, more focused on the games and winning

Jimmy Mondal 28:17
even like a legacy brand. too

Paul Dawalibi 28:19
yeah. The number 250 million seems big. But in the long run, I actually think this is to Jeff’s point, it reeks of desperation. And I think it’s pretty short sighted, like the brand is fundamentally the value of these teams.

Unknown Speaker 28:35
That’s it. And I completely agree with Jeff like, I think it is a new paradigm and the way we are doing things is shifting, but can’t creative. You live in eSports II, it’s electronic. The whole thing is made up we can do whatever we want. You can put things on your characters in game to you know what I mean? Like, I feel like there’s so many more visual ways to actually and effectively advertise to that team fan base. That is so much better than what they came up with this time around, but I’m totally in agreeance with you guys. I think there was a much better way to do Jimmy B

Paul Dawalibi 29:11
or Lindsay or William Do any of you guys think this will work out? Well for F TX like do you think at the end? What’s the length of the contract? Sorry, I forget now. Sorry.

Jimmy Baratta 29:24
I thought I was around 10 years, wasn’t it?

Paul Dawalibi 29:25
Yeah. Like does anyone think at the end of this contract? f TX will will will say this was totally worth the dollars we spent.

Jeff Cohen 29:34
I don’t think ft x will be around at the end of this contract. Aren’t they like a cryptocurrency exchange? fifth best cryptocurrency exchange.

Paul Dawalibi 29:43
I mean, it’s a big amount of money. It’s a commodity. You’re so in in and it seems like a low impact kind of thing. Like I feel like no one’s gonna call the team TSM f TX. You know what I mean? Like the casters, won’t the The fans won’t

William Collis 30:02
like law firms right with me. Nobody reads out all the law firm.

Lindsay Poss 30:13
Okay, then I sort of have to counterpoint to that. The first is not that I don’t agree with everything comes up. And I don’t think that this is a great, great idea. But the first thing is, if your brand is already strong enough anyway, then why not just take the money and run? If this is all the case, and nobody’s gonna say anything? It’s just some news point. It’s an exchange, it’s gonna go by the wayside anyway, then what’s the harm?

Paul Dawalibi 30:37
Sure. True. Other than, yeah, you’re right, do you? I mean, you’re assuming that they’re, that no one will like, and I think you’re right, like, no one’s I don’t think does anyone think a TSM fan previously, sees this deal and goes, I’m not gonna cheer for TSM anymore, because now they’re TSM f dx? No, right. Like, probably not. So it doesn’t hurt them. It’s free money.

Unknown Speaker 31:03
Yeah. And Jeff’s point, I just think, yeah, it’s, it’s free money. Lindsey, I think you made a really good point. But to Jeff’s point, it’s gotta be a better way to do it. But I totally agree. There’s no harm, you know, we were just talking about it. We’re not going to call it TSM FTS, it’s going to still be TSM. And I think Lindsay made a really good point, like, yeah, they’re probably just going to take those 250 million. Keep going down on building this legacy. It’s like,

Paul Dawalibi 31:25
it’s like the equivalent of Jeff’s sort of funny example. I think, if we ran with it, right. It says, If Slim Jim paid me to put Slim Jim on my birth certificate, right, change my birth, but everyone still calls me, Paul. Right? Like, effectively, it’s like,

Jimmy Baratta 31:42
you’d have to go by Slim Jim. That episode of community with a subway guy, remember? You have to go by so many

Lindsay Poss 31:51
come back is the Honda guy. Oh,

Paul Dawalibi 31:55
you were gonna comment on this?

William Collis 31:57
You like me, I’m really enjoying the dialogue about this. Because I see pros and cons on both sides. I’m genuinely, genuinely thinking through both arguments. Because on the one hand, and it’s a very compelling point is $200 million. Like that. That’s a big point, no matter how you cut it, on the other hand, are all the other concerns that everybody is laying against? Because let’s be honest, the only reason to this is the money. Right? Let’s be clear, there is no other strategic or value driven reason to do this. It is entirely CSM gains nothing from this. Yeah, other than higher league. Like there’s no argument that can be made. This is a sinister name change. Yeah,

Jimmy Baratta 32:35
get a better name. Right, right. It’s

William Collis 32:36
not It’s not like they were called before, like, yield cobblestone store and ranch. And now they’re f TX. Like, it’s like, they get an objectively worse name like this is, you know, but yeah, so I’m, I’m weighing all of that. And the question, I guess, I’m coming down to and this is a really fundamental question, which is why I’m like, Whoa, on this is, what are these teams, like, like, what is because essentially, what this is saying is, the easy thing that you do as a brand marketer, when you’re defining a brand, is you define the collection of assets that are the brand, right? And you want to make sure that whatever you’re, you know, holding, and typically, one of the things in your holding ownership is the logo and the colors, right, which go across everything and unify. And that’s why it’s such a big deal. That’s like, coke cans look the same in every country. And like, that’s the value of the brand is consistency. And, and this is sort of saying like, No, we might have a different collection of attributes that matter, right? Like, we might not think the brand is the most important thing about our organization. And I’m just, I’m really wrestling with that, if that can be true, because it’s interesting. If that’s true, then sports teams have done it wrong. Like if that’s true, then sports teams have done it wrong, right? And like you don’t have any problem that there are sports stadiums named after brands, right? Like, think of every single Stadium in the world is basically named after a brand sponsor. You know what I mean? So we don’t think that’s weird, right? But

Paul Dawalibi 34:09
well, William, why don’t the sports teams do it? What’s the theory there? Does anyone have a theory? Why? Why every traditional sports team, because arguably, if FTS, is willing to offer TSM 250 million, there’s some brand willing to offer more to you guys mentioned the Green Bay Packers, right? Like I don’t know if

Lindsay Poss 34:30
this is so earlier, when I said I had two points in the first place, basically, like the name doesn’t particularly matter. The second point was I kind of wanted to zoom out and look at how we how we all think of branding globally. And I think in the US, there’s a very defined set of rules that people follow. And it tends to be this sort of, keep your branch close to the best. Don’t take risks with it kind of attitude and approach but I don’t necessarily think that applies I wasn’t the world’s and I will suggest them as USBs team, so they’re kind of Following their own rules here, but one of the things that was a really big wake up call for me was when I started watching European soccer. And because there’s no commercials, there’s a completely different way of advertising and getting out the message of sponsors of those games. And I, I, quite frankly, found it appalling. Like, I hated that the jerseys were messy, I hated that the stadiums were covered in things, I hated that the towels that the gay fans or t shirts or whatever had sponsors on it drove me nuts at first. But that’s just because I am accustomed to a certain way of brands maintaining basically like to, to their own detriment, the integrity. And I do think that changing that approach up is risky, obviously. But given that this is a new space, TSM has the opportunity to do it. And especially since they got another three letter company, that’s it’s sex, like it’s a, it’s kind of deserve at least a weird TSM like three letter, acronym, whatever, it’s easy to kind of roll it off the tongue and also just kind of forget about it. This is kind of a a low level way to me, of them re approaching the way that they brand themselves in a way that someone like the Green Bay Packers could never do. Because people have gotten very staunchly entrenched in the way that they view these legacy brands.

Paul Dawalibi 36:19
Cam asked question here think they’ll split in the long run? Do we think this deal will last?

William Collis 36:24
That’s a really triggers what ends after 10 years? Like what do you have to like redo a free? It’s really interesting, because I I mean, we can add to that for sure. I want to go the other side, like we’ve been talking about this very much from tsms. perspective. I’m more interested in the sponsors perspective, which is worth it. Because whether or not this is the right decision for TSM. Like the question is, is this going to be a trend across the industry? And if it’s worth it for this sponsor, it likely will be a trend across the industry. Right. So my question, I want to dig into that a little more like, what do we think ft x gets from this? Like, like, tell me honestly, what do they get from this?

Unknown Speaker 37:02
I, I think access to all like, you know, you had to have been sleeping under a rock this past year, if you weren’t, you know, listening to the crypto craze, all this pokemon stuff going on, and everything basically going into digital currency. And I think that’s a massive base of people who are just legally getting access to trade their money, you know what I mean? And I think maybe they’re looking for that spike in a user base to come to crypto because like, I think for the audience, that’s younger. You know, Jeff had mentioned it, they’re like the fourth or fifth most popular exchange, but in terms of brand presence, what other brands are present in eSports, and gaming in terms of crypto. And I think, William, you brought a really good point about the sponsors like TSM is rare case, in that their legacy team that succeeded. Without a title sponsor pretty much like you have teams in Europe, they’re like funplus, Phoenix, or like Shopify rebellion or something like that. They’ve already got that title sponsor, from the moment they’re formed. So I think these types of deals will also get rarer and rarer. As we see less and less legacy teams continue to exist, but I could be completely wrong in that as well.

Paul Dawalibi 38:18
I think that what they’re counting on, William, my view on this is that and I think most people would agree that there’s probably virtually perfect overlap between gamers and people interested in crypto. Right. And to me, it’s just access to that audience. I think it’s that simple. I don’t I don’t think there it’s much more complicated than that. It’s gaming and gaming fans and eSports fans are probably the most target rich audience for any of these exchanges. And I would argue the same for just about any cutting edge, FinTech, crypto play, right like if you’re Robin Hood, if your whatever your any of these things that are at the cutting edge of finance, crypto blockchain all of these very cool technologies and movements. This is fundamentally fundamentally where I see why I CF tx making this kind of move. That’s what they’re hoping to get out of.

William Collis 39:17
The question is like, you can it’s not customer overlap is not the reason to do this. I want to push back because yeah, it’s a bit like, you can buy a ton of TV commercials. You can buy a ton of online ads with direct click right? You can buy like I mean, turn 3 million like, you know, we’re not talking like you’re on the B roll post fold on a new site. That’s like you could be the title sponsor of a superbowl commercial. You know what I mean? And I know that

Paul Dawalibi 39:47
a lot of Superbowl commercials for 250 million that is what I’m making is,

William Collis 39:52
is that the alternative for this for F TX was not not marketed at all. It’s spend all of this money to Market through a name change, or by tons and tons of basically infinite other marketing. Right? Yeah. And yeah, that that’s the thing that I’m

Paul Dawalibi 40:11
more, it’s more, I think it’s more a statement on the crypto world than on the gaming world, right? Like, these crypto companies are flush with investor cash. They’re flush with customer cash, right? The everything has been going up for the last, you know, 1010 years. And so you get maybe some crazy spending, right? And maybe you even call it irresponsible spending, right? Was 250 million, the right number to plunk on one sort of marketing activation? You’re right, that’s maybe a tough question to answer. That’s not such a tough question to answer, right? Would you have done it with anyone in this room have done that made the same move? Jimmy B, you have $250 million? Your f TX is TSM, the first place you would have looked?

Jimmy Baratta 41:04
Probably not.

William Collis 41:08
I mean, just think about what

Paul Dawalibi 41:11
they could have done, they could have given TSM 50 million. And I think TSM would have been over the moon and still would have made all the headlines, we’d all still be talking about it. Right? Like does anyone think a $50 million deal wouldn’t have got the same amount of play?

William Collis 41:27
That’s a good point. The other thing is like, what else can you buy for like, 3 million, you can launch your own games. Like that’s what epic has spent watching the epic game store. Right? Like, you can like make the sales platform. And I know it’s not quite a parallel but like, like, like when these large sums of money she has hands like it’s like you really have to contextualize it. And it’s like, they literally could have launched funded and created their own MOBA and shooter probably and they probably could have been I mean, I’m not saying

Paul Dawalibi 42:01
TSM players. Yeah. Who knows? Yeah. 50 million. Yeah. Yeah. I just want to read some of these comments.

Lindsay Poss 42:11
I felt like could have built half a stadium in Toronto

Paul Dawalibi 42:15
would have had 3000 seats. Terry says FYI, TBD. WTF Ts. rolls off the tongue just as nice. Christian, I don’t see the name change is a great brand move for TSM. It’s a lot of money. But it’s too much of a mouthful, maybe the beginning of the end of TSM brand. I mean, they have 250 million locked in now. So chances are their bills are mostly paid. I would think like this puts TSM probably in profitable territory, I would hope. I don’t know if you guys think does anyone think this is the beginning of the end of the TSM? brand? Probably not.

Unknown Speaker 42:56
I was a little concerned about TSM in the years leading up to this, because we kept hearing about them, you know, making moves into the streamer world. And really, in terms of content, but they weren’t winning titles anymore. They don’t have that sort of championship credibility anymore, and they haven’t for years. And so for me as a fan of TSM, my passion for following them is kind of waning, because they don’t have these star players didn’t even make it to Iceland for valorant. Like these are their premier things and they’re not able to achieve in them. However, there’s clearly something else going on that we don’t know about that. They see value, I think,

William Collis 43:35
isn’t that then a whole lot worse for TSM just plays that because basically you’re saying as well the like the collection of attributes like TSM, to me used to stand for winning? Well, they’re not winners anymore, right? Why are you loyal to TSM? It’s something you know, like,

Unknown Speaker 43:51
I think it’s like the Yankees problem, right? Like, they haven’t been good in forever. But you’re still a Yankees fan, because they’re the Yankees. They were the team back in the day. And so like, even the branding of TSM I feel like is iconic in the same sense. But I think to your point, maybe with that extra money like 250s a lot, maybe more of it goes to funding eSports teams that actually win for once and aren’t just jokes and knock them with ornaments all the time. And maybe that also funds their further success in this 10 year plan. Maybe you know, I’m thinking honestly, Romsey made a good point in the comments as well talking about content creators and their 10 year plan and streamers and things like that. Maybe that’s the road though. Head down instead. But I think you bring up a good point with that.

Paul Dawalibi 44:35
Yeah, Greg, Greg mentioned that ft. x also bought the rights to rename the Miami arena. So they’re clearly have a lot of money to throw around. So this was not their only play, Kim said, agrees with Jeff. And Greg says, Do you believe FTS, can bring any value? Besides the funding, opening up new markets and FTS? Does anyone think they needed ft x for that maybe that would be my sort of question like, could they not have done any of those things? NF T’s are new markets without FDA, that’s

Jimmy Baratta 45:05
the most compelling part to me about all of this was what you’d mentioned where for a lot less money, they could have achieved every one of these different initiatives, right? Your each year, or maybe one this year or one next year, the same press higher ROI. So it’s just like, what was the thinking there is kind of the most perplexing part about this.

Paul Dawalibi 45:25
I mean, I’m gonna agree with all these ft x moves, because I’m thinking we should be reaching out to

William Collis 45:33
get on it. Myself.

Paul Dawalibi 45:37
Yeah. If next week, this is the business of Esports ft. x podcast. Now we just call it ft x the business of Esports.

William Collis 45:49
point one last quickly on this then, like, is the dollar value actually is largest? We think because the other thing I was saying because it’s trying to 50 million, which is huge. But divided by 10. Right? Is this is a 10 year deal. Right? I’m just sorry. Can I just

Paul Dawalibi 46:05
let me let me point something out on this point. That’s a good point, William, it’s 21 million British pounds per year, okay, for 10 years. But that’s twice what they paid for the naming rights of that NBA stadium for the Miami Heat. So they paid half for the naming rights for the end for the Miami heats arena.

Jimmy Baratta 46:25
naming rights for stadiums are very expensive.

Paul Dawalibi 46:29
But I would argue that the an NBA franchise is going to be a lot larger audience, I would think,

Jimmy Baratta 46:36
yeah, it’s more valuable to me to have the naming rights on the stadium than the naming rights on an Esports. Team. I think in terms of that, at least today,

Paul Dawalibi 46:44
maybe, maybe not five years from now, maybe not 10 years from now. But maybe that’s their bet, right? Like part of the thinking here could be 10 years from now, maybe people will be charging $100 million a year, pick a number, right to sponsor have to get the naming rights for an Esports. Team. And if I lock in 25 million a year now? I’m good, right? I’m golden. I don’t know. Maybe they’re betting that those prices are going to go up very quickly. I mean, William, I don’t know you’re, you know,

William Collis 47:14
no, good. Good point. But then the flip side is then who knows more about the esports? market? TSM or F TX? Because if that’s true, why is TSM gonna sign a deal? Why are they gonna lock? Oh, great. We’ll sign it now will lock in that low rate. deal for us ever? Yeah.

Paul Dawalibi 47:30
Like, I’m just going to,

Jimmy Baratta 47:32
I’m sorry, one. But like, to your point? Did they just set the rate for the rest of the industry as well?

Paul Dawalibi 47:35
Yeah, maybe they have, right? Do we see deals? Who thinks that we’re gonna see deals? And in chat also, who thinks we’re gonna see deals? at this scale with other teams like, well, we see a phase deal? Will we see 100 thieves deal? Will we see those things?

Unknown Speaker 47:53
I don’t know. I think phase and 100. thieves are very egoistic. And very, they have their brand, they’re gonna run with it. But I agree with you to the 100, thieves cash app compound, you know, that’s like a thing already? Sure. Well, we

Paul Dawalibi 48:07
see 100, thieves cash app be like the name of the team for an extra, you know, 25 million a year.

Jeff Cohen 48:13
Jeff? Well, to your point, I don’t think anyone would call it that. So the, you know, the one thing with, you know, being TSM, FTS, it kind of like, like Lindsay said earlier, it does roll off the tongue a little bit. Like, you know, 100, thieves cash app. That’s not, that’s not a now.

William Collis 48:32
And this might be one thing to wrap on. But regardless, it was a good idea or not, they were smart to be first. You know what I mean? Like, because however, much of a lot of the reason why this is getting so much lift in play, is because it’s the first time it’s happened, right? The third time this happens, and you’re gonna talk about it this much, will be like, it’ll just be like another sponsorship will be like, oh, there’s another spa, there’s another car company coming into E. So I’m just saying like, in some sense, and in some sense, this sort of is I think, like the crypto market mentality is like, just go huge at new things. You know what I mean? And like, I don’t know, it’s just interesting.

Paul Dawalibi 49:10
I just want to get through these comments, and then we’ll move on guys. Ramsey says parallel in the sports world is Red Bull, who own soccer teams across Europe and Red Bull features and all the team names. Yeah, I mean, Red Bull seems to do that better than anyone, right? Like the with even an f1, which I’m a big fan of like Red Bull Racing. It’s unusual to have sort of the sponsor be the main part of the name, but Red Bull seems to get away with it. Maybe because Red Bull is cool, right? Yeah, they have a brand and people’s cool. You want to be part of it. They are owners though not just sponsors true. Also, a 10 year deal means they benefit from all of Esports and tsms growth across their streamers across the world, knowing that they will be hitting their target audience. Yeah, I mean, Ramsey I think the discussion we had been around this though, like are they getting their money’s worth? Even with the content creators, even with all those things unclear, right like, I don’t I don’t have, I don’t know, tsms numbers specifically enough to be able to say. But I just want to read Christian’s comment here before I get to the other ones because I think this is the answer to many of these question, which is, I hope we see more of these deals, rising tide raises all boats. I think that is what’s good for everybody. Right? Whether we think they pay too much, they paid too little. They won’t get enough out of it. They’re gonna get plenty out of it. It’s good for the industry as a whole.

William Collis 50:36
I don’t know guys, I don’t know if this is a rising tide floats all the boats scenario. I don’t I don’t know if I believe that. Well, let me put it this way. Right. Adams give you an example. Let’s say I’m Activision Blizzard, and I’m franchising a new game, right? Who can I get to participate in this game? I can get teams. We know what teams will pay for franchises, right? I can get them to pay 2030? Or do I call up at&t? You know, like the point the point I’m making here is I think we have to be careful about what this really means. Because when something as fundamental as the brand is going to be played with, it really goes to a fundamental question of what like what’s necessary here? Right? Like Like what’s about like, and take my example seriously, like Shopify created their own eSports team, right? Like why couldn’t Blizzard do the same thing? And have a league and why can’t the next league for you know whatever it’s gonna be? Why can’t that be? Eight corporations to do what Shopify? Did? You know, it’s kind of what the Overwatch league is, though. Isn’t it? Like that? Very good point. Actually, you could argue the Overwatch it is that it’s it’s the path. Yeah, I think 100% that’s what they went for. That’s an extreme example. I’m not saying it. But like, I just think this is something deeper here. And it may end up only leaving a cosmetic change, right? But there’s a real fundamental question being asked about like, what like, what, what is the collection about like, what is what is the value? Where is the value in a team? And this is saying the value of the team is not in the name. Okay, but then it’s

Paul Dawalibi 52:17
really saying that, William, because they’re paying 250 million for that. I think there’s also some value. I think it’s kind

Unknown Speaker 52:26
of 5050 because you have these established brands and like optic and faze who are trying to get into the Call of Duty league or something like that, and they literally had to change their entire brands, which did not work and it failed miserably and now you see them it’s optic Chicago Atlanta phase, like Jimmy mentioned earlier. Like I think you they will run into these problems and I think there’ll be growing pains for sure. And I think they’re gonna have to figure it out because I don’t I think the brand is that important. Like optics? The Huntsman who’s gonna remember the Huntsman five years from now? It’s gonna be optics Chicago, it’s gonna be Atlanta phase like, the Minnesota rocker. What is that? You know, like these things are?

Paul Dawalibi 53:10
I think that’s a marketing genius, Gary Vaynerchuk. Behind that one, though. Come on, guys.

William Collis 53:14
You gotta love it too, or something? Like because when Vikings all in Minnesota, like

Paul Dawalibi 53:24
camp says 100 thieves and commit to the dynasty, way more Poland LA. And Christian says I think it had to be a bigger deal for the PR plus its finance related so as to be a large number. Yeah, I think like I said, I think 50 million would have been a large enough number to get the PR impact. I don’t think they needed 150.