Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WFT Branding Study (Part 2)


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, #httr1979 said:

Wolves is so generic. It’s crazy to not call them Redwolves.........

 

I was watching basketball last night and we were playing Atlanta Hawks. I thought it was such a generic name and doesn't even sound right. I understand some here are so against the Redwolves thing and yes there are other types of wolves but I could warm up to Redwolves and even kinda a like it. Any other types of wolves probably won't sound right.

 

I guess with the name starting with the letter R you can still say HTTR! :)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, #httr1979 said:

Interesting observation. Numerous posts about why we can’t be the Redwolves because the color might trigger some people and you’re focusing on me. Doesn’t that show bias in your thinking that you’re supposedly accusing me of?

I'm not sure who said "red" would trigger anyone. 

 

That doesn't make sense. The precedent is from Arkansas state changing from Indians to Red Wolves. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DCdangerous said:

P.S. Even if a TM is suspended, it would still be in use. So even if WSH decided to apply for "Washington Football Warriors est 1932" to avoid confusion with GSW and warriors Sports, someone with a suspended football TM for Warriors, like Don Terry, could still claim confusion.


Awesome, thanks for explaining.  I’ve got you now.  Specifically to the above paragraph, is it not reasonable to assume that once that decision is made...let’s say for instance they DID try to trademark that name you used as an example.  Would they not make contact with those most likely to oppose them and find out what they can do to ensure that doesn’t happen?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

That doesn't make sense. The precedent is from Arkansas state changing from Indians to Red Wolves. 

 

 

Yup, and there are even more examples beyond that. History has already shown us multiple universities and organizations that have been through the process

 

Redskins to Redwolves

Redskins to Red Hawks

Indians to Redwolves

Redmen to Red Storm

 

There are several examples of NA based mascots, some with our exact name of Redskins, changing to Redwolf or similar name structures w/ no issue. I have not seen any historical data that would suggest such a change would be problematic in any way, shape or form. The idea that it would is not grounded in any precedent.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Painkiller said:


Awesome, thanks for explaining.  I’ve got you now.  Specifically to the above paragraph, is it not reasonable to assume that once that decision is made...let’s say for instance they DID try to trademark that name you used as an example.  Would they not make contact with those most likely to oppose them and find out what they can do to ensure that doesn’t happen?  

Nope. Because that person will know how important that name is and ask for a really high price. Even if they make a deal, anybody with a similar TM can also claim confusion. Like the rugby one, and ask for a higher price.

If you have to keep a TM alive by paying many people off, it's not a strong TM.  
 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@DCdangerous so basically what you are saying is we are most likely going to end up with a name that nobody has currently trademarked OR has tried to trademark because any other path is too difficult to have the name “buttoned up” by 2022?

 

so we end up with something most likely nobody else has thought of yet, that’s scary.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Painkiller
There is a big difference between paying one person for their TM, and paying off multiple people with a similar TM.
I looked at the USPTO and I see a couple of TMs of team names (not named Warriors) we all talked about that can be acquired WHILE they are waiting for review, publication or registration.

Acquiring a TM that has the clearest path to registration is the best way to get the name "buttoned up". Warriors would have the hardest path of all of them. Redwolves would be the second hardest. But Wolves would actually be just right.  There is one TM waiting for a review called Washington Football Wolves. If WSH acquires that TM, they can avoid any confusion in ANY class from the NBA Minnesota Timberwolves (Wolves on their jersey TM) or even the AHL Chicago Wolves (have Wolves TM in hockey and merch class but no logo or color declaration like WFW does).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DCdangerous said:

I looked at the USPTO and I see a couple of TMs of team names (not named Warriors) we all talked about that can be acquired WHILE they are waiting for review, publication or registration

 

 

Any competent re-brand process should be trying to lock up a range of TMs. While you can certainly have one name you want/desire, you can't put all your eggs in one basket and then come up w/ nada two years later. Developing and acquiring multiple brands will be a key factor moving forward, even if you don't end up using the majority in the long run.

 

If you can get Hogs outright right now for example, you do it. It does not mean you gotta use it, just gotta squat on it a little while. By the time the trademark is revoked for inactivity, you'll already have your new name most likely.

 

WFT just isn't a strong enough back-up since you can't claim an area. If an XFL team pops up in DC, I don't think you can stop them from being WFT if they have their own distinct logo and colors

Edited by FootballZombie
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

WFT just isn't a strong enough back-up since you can't claim an area. If an XFL team pops up in DC, I don't think you can stop them from being WFT if they have their own distinct logo and colors

 

What exactly do you mean by " claim an area " ?

 

Another question ...

 

If a minor league baseball team could possibly be changing its name ( Redwolves ) for fear of being " swallowed up " by the professional team, why would the XFL team want to do the opposite ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

What exactly do you mean by " claim an area " ?

 

Another question ...

 

If a minor league baseball team could possibly be changing its name ( Redwolves ) for fear of being " swallowed up " by the professional team, why would the XFL team want to do the opposite ?

 

 

 

You can claim association to an area, but you can't copyright the name of a city. Being the Washington "insert name" does not stop someone else from being the Washington "insert different name"

 

The remainder of our moniker is "Football Team". Not exactly something you can copyright either. So basically what we claim ownership over is WFT Est 1932 more so than just WFT

 

So, if you start a football team, in Washington, and you want to be the Washington football team, there is not too much to stop you under copyright law as long as you don't ape our current branding (logo, colors, slogans, ect.)

We'd fight the heck out of it of course, w/ an army of lawyers, but the option will be available to pivot to Wash Football Team or DC Football team and that would be pretty unstoppable. We can't own an area and they are a football team after all.

 

Sports Name Association in common markets is a modern practice we see take place all across the country. Teams used to share the same exact names, but that has changed due to evolution in copyright constraints and exposure levels.

 

Wizards and Mystics, Eagles and Flyers, stuff like that. Sometimes the stars align and you get massive unintended coincidences like the Hou Astros, Rockets and Comets, but the association result is still the same.

 

It basically  would be free advertising. If there is an NFL team in the area named WFT, and you can name your new football team WFT, there would be considerable benefits to consider. If you got a chance to piggy-back one of the largest NFL teams, you have to think about it.

 

 

 

 

As for the swallowed up Q, a large scale professional team does not share the same fears as a small scale minor team.

 

 

A professional team in a new league will have a ton of financial backing.  An XFL team will have money coming in from TV deals, large scale advertising contracts, merch, tickets and more

 

A minor L team probably makes 90% of its revenue off of merch and ticket sales. They have to move product to survive. A professional team, not so much.

 

A new minor L team can utilize the similar branding approach to great success, and many obviously do, but it is most effective if done in the same market. It could have negative results otherwise.

 

An existing minor team that already has an established and effective business model suddenly sharing the name of a nearby NFL team while in the Car Panther's market is probably not in their best interest.

 

If they see even a 30% dip in sales due to a "Panther's rebuff" that could be catastrophic. That might be enough to cause a small organization to fold. That is not totally out of the question, as there could be some hesitancy from Washington Football fans in DC, to support... lets say a tennis team called the Ravens.

 

 

The Florence Redwolves team knows they have a viable business model. If they can retain a unique moniker, they should be confident that they can retain their current revenue stream. They are currently building a new stadium, so this would also be a really bad time for a revenue dip.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

It basically  would be free advertising. If there is an NFL team in the area named WFT, and you can name your new football team WFT, there would be considerable benefits to consider.

 

When Dan Snyder was entertaining the idea of an Arena team, why did he attempt to secure " Warriors " ? 

Why not just go with " Redskins " ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Spearfeather said:

 

When Dan Snyder was entertaining the idea of an Arena team, why did he attempt to secure " Warriors " ? 

Why not just go with " Redskins " ?

 

He probably wanted Warriors for its association to Redskins

 

Wizards and Mystics like connection

 

Redskins was trademarked. Any attempt to register another Redskins football team in Wash would have been blocked and the original Washington Redskins TM would be protected, whether from Snyder or anyone.

 

 

WFT does not have those same protections around it tho.

Edited by FootballZombie
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Not sure if it's already been asked, but who currently owns that trademark ?

 

 

Basically Snyder.

 

I think everything Wash Football/Redskins related is owned by its parent company Pro Football Inc where Snyder is the Key Principal

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they go with Washington Football Club, I’m surprised they didn’t just do that after the non-controversy that was forced by white billionaires last year. I know there is an existing Washington Football Club soccer team but not sure the trademark status.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 09 said:

The “W” is here to stay.   It’s gonna be WFT or WFC.

 

 

8DEEFD1F-D8D4-4479-BF76-6F426BBD88B4.jpeg

 

why does that logo make you say that?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

WFC would be awful.

 

WFT is better than every alternative to me other than Warriors.

 

I recalled liking DC Warriors back at the start of this discussion.

 

Washington Warriors for me.....I think...but now that I’ve said that I’m still not sure :ols:

 

Tough call.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

WFC would be awful.

 

WFT is better than every alternative to me other than Warriors.

 

I recalled liking DC Warriors back at the start of this discussion.

 

Washington Warriors for me.....I think...but now that I’ve said that I’m still not sure :ols:

 

Tough call.

 

Me as well, I've made that abundantly clear in this thread.  However, the truth of the matter is trademark concerns are likely going to influence this decision.  Personally, I hope we don't end up with a **** name because nobody in the organization had any foresight to have a plan B for decades. 

 

I get that as a fan Dan never wanted to change the name, and word getting out that the organization was trying to secure trademarks for other names would have just added to the pressure on him to change the name, but damn...very frustrating that it's led us to this predicament.  Oh well...        

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2021 at 3:37 PM, DCdangerous said:

But Wolves would actually be just right.  There is one TM waiting for a review called Washington Football Wolves. If WSH acquires that TM, they can avoid any confusion in ANY class from the NBA Minnesota Timberwolves (Wolves on their jersey TM) or even the AHL Chicago Wolves (have Wolves TM in hockey and merch class but no logo or color declaration like WFW does).

 

After all that clarity you provided on the trademark stuff...Wolves would work for me.  I'd consider Wolves a gift from the almighty at this point. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Painkiller said:

 

After all that clarity you provided on the trademark stuff...Wolves would work for me.  I'd consider Wolves a gift from the almighty at this point. 

No

Link to post
Share on other sites

WFT or WFC would ensure that I and many others never buy a piece of gear, and that everyone continues to call them the Redskins.  For what they supposedly want to do its a terrible idea.

 

Which is why Snyder will probably do it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

WFT or WFC would ensure that I and many others never buy a piece of gear, ...

 

But other people are going to do the same thing if other names are chosen, also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...