430 replies to this topic

[Martyn Sadler]

There has been a lot of speculation about the new sponsorship deal on this forum.

You can now read the facts in today's issue of League Express, and find out why I tweeted that it was a remarkable deal for Stobart.

Betfair was offering more money than Stobart, but not enough to swing the deal.

Read about the details of a heated Super League meeting, and ready my analysis of the deal in today's edition.

The RFL has taken a significant gamble that may prove to be a stroke of genius or a flop, depending on whether they can take advantage of what they've agreed.

[Marauder]

Martyn Sadler, on 23 January 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

There has been a lot of speculation about the new sponsorship deal on this forum.

You can now read the facts in today's issue of League Express, and find out why I tweeted that it was a remarkable deal for Stobart.

Betfair was offering more money than Stobart, but not enough to swing the deal.

Read about the details of a heated Super League meeting, and ready my analysis of the deal in today's edition.

The RFL has taken a significant gamble that may prove to be a stroke of genius or a flop, depending on whether they can take advantage of what they've agreed.

Is the deal to have the Rugby League brand plastered on their truck's Nationwide?

[Didgi]

Is League Express available online or for iPhone?

[the horseman]

betfair would have been my choice it is not the right financial climate to be gambling .bad form rfl heads should roll for this

[Just Browny]

the horseman, on 23 January 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

betfair would have been my choice it is not the right financial climate to be gambling

You couldn't make it up.

[gingerjon]

I'd be interested in knowing just how unique this form of in-kind sponsorship is.

[brooza]

the horseman, on 23 January 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

it is not the right financial climate to be gambling

Good job the RFL didn't agree sponsorship with a gambling company then!

[Matt J]

If its having SL on the side of a nationwide fleet of trucks then Stobarts offer should have been taken over Betfairs.

Fans claim we need to be seen nationwide, IF IT IS THIS then its a good bit of work by the RFL ( )

[Maximus Decimus]

Matt J, on 23 January 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

If its having SL on the side of a nationwide fleet of trucks then Stobarts offer should have been taken over Betfairs.

Fans claim we need to be seen nationwide, IF IT IS THIS then its a good bit of work by the RFL ( )

For some reason, companies involved with Rugby League don't seem to use it in advertising campaigns, whether on TV or elsewhere.

Stobart could very well be the sort of company that will do this. The RFL should be applauded for taking the chance.

[GeordieSaint]

Maximus Decimus, on 23 January 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

Stobart could very well be the sort of company that will do this. The RFL should be applauded for taking the chance.

Completely agree. The game needs more exposure and if Stobart are willing to do this, the RFL are completely justified in taking less money; wider exposure could bring in more revenue in the long term, rather than a quick money making fix.

I think it also shows the RFL are becoming much more confident having made a profit consistently over the last few years; they are now starting to look at the bigger picture.

[Futtocks]

Maximus Decimus, on 23 January 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

For some reason, companies involved with Rugby League don't seem to use it in advertising campaigns, whether on TV or elsewhere.

Stobart could very well be the sort of company that will do this. The RFL should be applauded for taking the chance.

If Stobarts have signed up to do something of this sort, then that's great. It is something that the RFL should always be looking for in a sponsorship deal.

Let's not forget, this is the company that made something as prosaic as a trucking firm nationally famous. They must have more than a clue than most about promotion and public awareness.

Edited by Futtocks, 23 January 2012 - 12:19 PM.

[gingerjon]

Maximus Decimus, on 23 January 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

For some reason, companies involved with Rugby League don't seem to use it in advertising campaigns, whether on TV or elsewhere.

Stobart could very well be the sort of company that will do this. The RFL should be applauded for taking the chance.

Engage were very good sponsors I thought and did promote the connection - but sadly that's not a huge or wide-reaching market.  Stobart is a different level and it's a very good brand to be associated with and I like the idea of Super League lorries going around the country, especially given the spotters' obsession.  I'm sure if they're interesting enough there will be die-cast models of SL Stobart lorries before long.

That said, we're not a wealthy sport and some actual money would have been nice.

I'm conflicted.

[Dave T]

The only figures we have seen here are from CANETMAN so they are possibly dubious at best, but let's look at the figures he does use:

engage: £1.2m pa (split 14 ways = £85k per team)
Stobart: £400k pa (split 14 ways = £28k per team)

Now excluding all additional benefits that may or may not be on offer, even if the low figure is correct, the shortfall for clubs is around £57k per year.

Whilst that is not to be sniffed at, the additional exposure may be worth well more than the £57k shortfall to each team.

There is also the fact that the RFL have got other sponsors involved in the game - Heinz for example - so who is to say that the overall sponsorship pot hasn't gone up?

I can't get the LE up here, so are there any more details available regarding the cash value, ancillary value, and the overall sponsorship pot value?

Without knowing all these things, I have no idea whether the RFL have done a good job here.

[Fax1978]

I agree that this is an excellent deal in that it will give the game much needed physical advertising exposure both nationally and internationally as Stobarts do work quite extensively on the continent.

An excellent bit of outside the box marketing thinking.

My only bugbear is that no money has also exchanged hands in this deal (LE quote) I appreciate that the cost of doing up the Trailers etc will be quite significant and as mentioned the exposure will be great but as the main SL sponsor they will be receiving exceptional coverage for their brand via Sky TV to me it sends out the message that Stobarts as a brand / business is as big as the entire sport of RL in this country as it can broker a deal on parity terms.

Overall though quite happy and hope the arrangement will bring the benefits it deserves. A bold move by the RFL especially since 3 clubs did not take part in the voting process, the votes were locked at 5 for and 5 against and they cast the deciding vote of the Catalans by proxy.

Edited by Fax1978, 23 January 2012 - 12:32 PM.

[hambletts minibus]

I must congratulate the super league reps at the meeting that chose Eddie Stobart as super league sponsors.

Instead of going for the money they have gone for the high profile,day in day out exposure rugby league needs, thousands of motorist on our motorways day after day will be seeing the super league logo not just on tv but in front of them.

Well done to all concerned.

[gingerjon]

Dave T, on 23 January 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

The only figures we have seen here are from CANETMAN so they are possibly dubious at best, but let's look at the figures he does use:

engage: £1.2m pa (split 14 ways = £85k per team)
Stobart: £400k pa (split 14 ways = £28k per team)

Now excluding all additional benefits that may or may not be on offer, even if the low figure is correct, the shortfall for clubs is around £57k per year.

Whilst that is not to be sniffed at, the additional exposure may be worth well more than the £57k shortfall to each team.

There is also the fact that the RFL have got other sponsors involved in the game - Heinz for example - so who is to say that the overall sponsorship pot hasn't gone up?

I can't get the LE up here, so are there any more details available regarding the cash value, ancillary value, and the overall sponsorship pot value?

Without knowing all these things, I have no idea whether the RFL have done a good job here.

There's no cash, it's all in-kind.

[gingerjon]

Can we merge this with the other thread?

[markleeds]

Also, why would a company want to pump money into a sport knowing that there will be page after page of moaning on forums like this. Companies spend thousands of pounds brand monitoring online and one look at the stuff on here will not make them put money into the game.

Edited by markleeds, 23 January 2012 - 12:54 PM.

[Dave T]

gingerjon, on 23 January 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

There's no cash, it's all in-kind.

That makes it very interesting. So we are in effect getting promotion worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

If this is the case, I wonder if the RFL took this approach to a few other companies. All we can assume is that the likes of Gillette, Tesco, Asda etc wouldn't be interested in providing us with promotion worth £500k-£1m per year in return for title rights.

[MrPosh]

the horseman, on 23 January 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

betfair would have been my choice it is not the right financial climate to be gambling .bad form rfl heads should roll for this