https://americanmilitarynews.com/2019/02...nine-line/

Quote:A patriotic pro-flag Super Bowl commercial from veteran-owned and -operated Nine Line Apparel company was reportedly rejected by the network that televised the big game on Sunday, and it has left many in the community wondering why.

Nine Line posted its 45-second commercial to YouTube on Saturday ahead of the Super Bowl, which was broadcast by the CBS network. The commercial already has more than a quarter million views on YouTube.

Quote:Nine Line Apparel CEO and co-founder Tyler Merritt told American Military News that he believes the ad was rejected because of its “patriotic, pro-flag message.”

Nine Line Apparel confirmed to American Military News on Monday that CBS cited “credit issues” as the reason for the denial.

“However, we provided credit references to them who promptly and honestly replied to CBS inquiries that Nine Line Apparel always fulfilled contracts and financial obligations in full and on time,” Nine Line said. “Our gross revenue is also a matter of public record ($25 million last year alone). We also reached out to our financial advisors and partners and not one of them stated that they were contacted by anyone from CBS.”

“We find it very hard to believe that our ad could be denied due to credit issues when, clearly, we can afford the spot. There is no real evidence to the contrary,” Nine Line added.

Quote:“I find it somewhat offensive,” Merritt said on Fox. “We’re a very successful company. Over the last five years, we’ve made over $75 million – $25 million last year. This is all public record. They can easily look up online and see some of our revenue gains. That wasn’t asked. They asked for our clip, and we submitted it.”

Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

plus, the NFL was probably the one that nixed it.

Yep. 25 million in revenue is peanuts when you're talking about super bowl airtime. No way they could afford it

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Seems a little confrontational so if the NFL nixed it I can almost see why.

First thing that jumps out is 25 million gross last year. They couldn't afford a spot.

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.
They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

That's kind of the way I see it, too. With the controversy, this will probably get more serious views by people inclined to buy their product than it would have had it aired.

And the spot would have been among the best of a bad bunch of adverts surrounded by a very boring football game. I like defense, I'd generally rather see 13-3 than 54-44. But not that 13-3.

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Inclined to agree.

(02-05-2019 08:18 AM)Paul M Wrote:  First thing that jumps out is 25 million gross last year. They couldn't afford a spot.

If his business model is strong he could easily borrow the money or bring in a private equity cash. Not saying I believe him though.

I don't disagree with the message, but that was a low quality production. Combine the potential for controversy, low quality production, and iffy credit based on revenue I could see why CBS would decline it.

I'm sure CBS isn't scrambling to fill advertisement slots for the super bowl so they probably decline a lot of stuff in favor of the big boys who have no issue cutting a check.

He probably never intended to actually get a spot, an ad like that getting denied will get his company a lot more attention from the targeted audience than the general public watching the game.

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Do you really think they are getting by on 10%? I could see 15% on the low end but I would expect 17 to 20%

I agree with the other part of your post.

Never heard of them.

I suspect they had enough venture capital lined up to pay for the ad. Let's face it, had they run the ad they would have had 250 million year after it ran. Easy.

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Never heard of them.

I hadn't either but after going to their site, they sell some nice looking long sleeve tees. I just bought this one for a friend and a hoodie for my son.

(02-05-2019 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  I suspect they had enough venture capital lined up to pay for the ad. Let's face it, had they run the ad they would have had 250 million year after it ran. Easy.

Maybe. But according to libs they should run a campaign on Facebook and it could change the outlook.

(02-05-2019 11:23 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Never heard of them.

I hadn't either but they sell some nice looking long sleeve tees I just bought this one for a friend. And a hoodie for my son.

Might check them out.

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Do you really think they are getting by on 10%? I could see 15% on the low end but I would expect 17 to 20%

I agree with the other part of your post.

I was being generous. The average net profit margin for the S&P companies in that segment is 7.9%. Few industries outside of info tech and pharma generate over 15% net margins. Nike, with it's high prices and brand power, has a net margin of 10.99%.

(02-05-2019 11:28 AM)banker Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Do you really think they are getting by on 10%? I could see 15% on the low end but I would expect 17 to 20%

I agree with the other part of your post.

I was being generous. The average net profit margin for the S&P companies in that segment is 7.9%. Few industries outside of info tech and pharma generate over 15% net margins. Nike, with it's high prices and brand power, has a net margin of 10.99%.

I misread your post see now you are talking net, not gross. I was being generous on the gross....if not in 25-30% they would be in trouble unless very low overhead cost.

I'm glad to see my ebay business that I started after retiring is doing a lot better than Nike....almost 3x (if not for postal rates...you could add 4x) but a helluva lot less volume. But we did go over the million dollar mark last year... started from a hobby, Halloween and Christmas props, I design and make. Then going to government auctions, and closeouts we find on football and basketball trips.

Made in America! out of parts bought from China

(02-05-2019 12:17 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 11:28 AM)banker Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-04-2019 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  Hate to do it, but I'm callin BS. The company has $25 million in revenue, which means, likely at best, they have net income of around $2.5 million. A 30 second spot for the SB this year was $5.25 million. That 45 second commercial would have cost around $7 million.

They couldn't afford it, but a great way to get publicity.

Do you really think they are getting by on 10%? I could see 15% on the low end but I would expect 17 to 20%

I agree with the other part of your post.

I was being generous. The average net profit margin for the S&P companies in that segment is 7.9%. Few industries outside of info tech and pharma generate over 15% net margins. Nike, with it's high prices and brand power, has a net margin of 10.99%.

I misread your post see now you are talking net, not gross. I was being generous on the gross....if not in 25-30% they would be in trouble unless very low overhead cost

Whatever their overhead is now using overseas manufacturing is probably about to go up when they shift to US manufacturing.

Quote:Nine Line is committed to continuing to create jobs here in America. We have made a conscious decision to move away from foreign made materials wherever possible, and are committed to creating a cut & sew factory here in Savannah, GA in the next three years. Although remaining profitable is the tenet of any successful business, we have innovative ways to ensure this occurs while returning manufacturing to the US.

(02-05-2019 11:04 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Never heard of them.

Neither has much of anyone else. I think that’s the point.

Now we all have, pretty smart move on their part really.