Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Martyn Sadler

Super League succeeding as a TV sport

52 posts in this topic

Should they hang their head in shame for the 19% increase too? Or because that is a positive is it nothing to do with them?

Sky for me, back chat, Monday nights live and all the tries on a Sunday night on SSN at 9.30 ... Extra exposure and plenty of adverts on all the channels

So why no title sponsor???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky for me, back chat, Monday nights live and all the tries on a Sunday night on SSN at 9.30 ... Extra exposure and plenty of adverts on all the channels

So why no title sponsor???

 

I agree a title sponsor would be nice, but I don't think they should hang their heads in shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am certain Kingstone Press Cider Sales are doing well in our area.

Is it available in the north?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree a title sponsor would be nice, but I don't think they should hang their heads in shame.

Gav, you have more to do with rugby league than me, I get involved and talk to various people at my club, but I speak from my heart.

In rugby league we have a fantastic product, from the kids on the school pitches, the amateur's on the park pitches and then the structures we have in place for the semi pros and the pros.

All levels of the game require sponsors and sponsorships to be able to survive, what I struggle with is the fact the top table hasn't got a main sponsor, just various associate sponsors....... So why do I worry???

If we don't have a title sponsor, how long will sponsors like the emirates, the co op or even the halliwell jones BMW dealership want to continue sponsoring our clubs??

We need blue chip companies to come on board and enjoy our sport..... Bringing in new sponsors along the way.

Super league is very marketable, priced for working families, no trouble, friendly, enjoyable and a product at all levels that works.

Ant eluded the ther day if Leeds and Wigan continue to dominate, how long before other clubs consider union.......... I understand his viewpoint on this, would be the end of my life if Warrington decided on this action to continue as a profitable business ... Heavn forbid or over my dead body

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else feel the title of the thread is a little wrong? Perhaps I'm being over pedantic. SL is the comp, RL is the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else feel the title of the thread is a little wrong? Perhaps I'm being over pedantic. SL is the comp, RL is the sport.

 

The title thread is accurate, because whilst SKY's viewership may have increased by 19% we are told. The Championship and NRL coverage on Premier Sports along with a large chuck of world cup games are low profile to say the least so Super League is doing OK but perhaps Rugby League less so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attended a conference yesterday (Thursday) at Headingley on the subject of 'Effective Commercial Partnerships.' in both codes of rugby.

 

One of the speakers was John Stainer, of the Repucom company, which undertakes market research, media evaluation and analyses market intelligence from 20 offices dotted around the world.

 

He made an interesting comparison of Super League's TV audience with those of the RBS Six Nations and the Aviva Premiership.

 

He pointed out that in the most recent complete seasons, the Six Nations audience had increased by 7%, the Aviva Premiership by 4%, but Super League's audience had increased by 19%.

 

Not only that, but his company had done major surveys of the audience for the two codes of rugby, and found that Rugby League supporters are particularly keen to embrace new products and, more importantly, are naturally inclined to buy the products of any sponsor that comes on board to back Rugby League.

 

He also found that the wider public associates qualities with Rugby League that are almost wholly positive - ranging from teamwork, discipline, toughness, athleticism and so on. The public impression of Rugby League is generally much more positive than it is of football, for example.

 

So it looks as though Rugby League is a sponsor's dream.

 

It prompted me to ask the obvious question of why, if all that is true, Rugby League appears to perform so badly commercially.

 

"Rugby League undersells itself," was his rather simple answer.

 

But it does make you think!

 

There will be more in Rugby League Express on Monday.

It prompts me to ask the question why does 'sky' under value superleague europe ltd so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is demographics.  There was an excellent thread on the cross-code forum a few years ago that I can't find that had links showing RU clubs deliberately highlighting their ABC1 spectator demographics while RL deliberately highlights its working class spectators.  You get far more advertising income for your ABC1 punter than your C2DE punter.

 

Not that I think RL should change its demographic in the slightest but you're not going to get the same companies interested in the game as RU.  Unfortunately, the big, cash-rich companies that would jump at the chance to sponsor a working class RL are ones that a lot of people consider morally challenged such as betting companies and the payday loan sharks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomin 'eck! What an excellent piece of fact and evidence based information!

Anyone know which company the RFL uses to get sponsorship contracts?

Makes me think that there is maybe some merit in the idea to have an SL1 and SL2: extending the SL brand and culture might well be a good thing....and if there is to be P and R it has to be done through licencing.

Bloomin eck John - almost choked on my wine at the last para! Cant believe we agree!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the companies involved in the RU Lions...HSBC, Microsoft, etc

RL can't get anything like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is demographics.  There was an excellent thread on the cross-code forum a few years ago that I can't find that had links showing RU clubs deliberately highlighting their ABC1 spectator demographics while RL deliberately highlights its working class spectators.  You get far more advertising income for your ABC1 punter than your C2DE punter.

 

Not that I think RL should change its demographic in the slightest but you're not going to get the same companies interested in the game as RU.  Unfortunately, the big, cash-rich companies that would jump at the chance to sponsor a working class RL are ones that a lot of people consider morally challenged such as betting companies and the payday loan sharks.

Do you think the TV money would be a lot higher if there was a 14 club sl league with coventry,bristol and gloucester in it instead of HKR,Bradford and Castleford for instance ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It prompts me to ask the question why does 'sky' under value superleague europe ltd so much

Value is what you can get for a product.

It's basically supply and demand.

If our game has a product that would be in the greatest demand it has to be tonight's SL game for example.

Wire.v.Hull, intense game, superstars on the pitch, exciting stuff.

But in terms of demand only SKY want our game.

So they can get a fantastic superior product at cut price.

We can either strive to make our best product even better so we may create more demand, or we can water the whole thing down and mess it up.

Peter Gentle and Tony Smith seem to get it.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Value is what you can get for a product.

It's basically supply and demand.

If our game has a product that would be in the greatest demand it has to be tonight's SL game for example.

Wire.v.Hull, intense game, superstars on the pitch, exciting stuff.

But in terms of demand only SKY want our game.

So they can get a fantastic superior product at cut price.

We can either strive to make our best product even better so we may create more demand, or we can water the whole thing down and mess it up.

Peter Gentle and Tony Smith seem to get it.....

The problem is, our best product is the game itself and yet we seem to have forgone that in an attempt to rush through the expantion of the game to the point, we've damaged the sport in its strongest areas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think the TV money would be a lot higher if there was a 14 club sl league with coventry,bristol and gloucester in it instead of HKR,Bradford and Castleford for instance ?

No, not in the slightest.  London, even with the Harlequins brand, didn't get the big bucks flowing in.  Why on earth would you lose core and proven clubs for those that, to be polite, aren't.  10 guaranteed punters in Hull, Bradford or Castleford are worth 100 potential punters in those other places.  Also, what's so special about Coventry, Bristol and Gloucester that would bring in money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is, our best product is the game itself

The game itself has no value as a product.

Professional Rugby League is what attracts £90,000,000 from SKY and more money and respect from the BBC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im confused as to what people actually mean by 'the game undersells itself'.

How?

Its not like we dont have opportunity for sponsors to come on board, there are loads.

Just to be clear, the most interesting thing in the Wood/Rimmer Q&A today was when one of them said after listing the various SL sponsors that "It is important to note that we believe across the whole sport in 2013 there will be more commercial revenue than ever before."

It is also worth noting that Sky do not have a sponsor for their coverage this season, and that is nothing to do with the RFL. Sky Media started looking for sponsors late last year and were unable to find one. So if they can't attract one when they are a specialist advertising sales business it suggests any problems are with the current market and economy, not simply the RFL "underselling".

Incidentally, they claim their Super League coverage reach is "an estimated 4.8m Individuals, 1.7m of which are Abc1 Men."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not in the slightest.  London, even with the Harlequins brand, didn't get the big bucks flowing in.  Why on earth would you lose core and proven clubs for those that, to be polite, aren't.  10 guaranteed punters in Hull, Bradford or Castleford are worth 100 potential punters in those other places.  Also, what's so special about Coventry, Bristol and Gloucester that would bring in money?

In a sport that is focusing so much on exspantion i thing the importance of bristol coventry and gloucester over HKR bradford and castleford is massive,why dont you think the same?.

Bums on seats 'paying a proper price for the product' has clearly been irelevent over SKY tv money,how is that good long term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, the most interesting thing in the Wood/Rimmer Q&A today was when one of them said after listing the various SL sponsors that "It is important to note that we believe across the whole sport in 2013 there will be more commercial revenue than ever before."

It is also worth noting that Sky do not have a sponsor for their coverage this season, and that is nothing to do with the RFL. Sky Media started looking for sponsors late last year and were unable to find one. So if they can't attract one when they are a specialist advertising sales business it suggests any problems are with the current market and economy, not simply the RFL "underselling".

Incidentally, they claim their Super League coverage reach is "an estimated 4.8m Individuals, 1.7m of which are Abc1 Men."

yes - its a good point about the sky coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total TV money is £135m. there was a graph in a PDF document released by the RFL that clearly showed the super league TV deal to be worth £115m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a sport that is focusing so much on exspantion i thing the importance of bristol coventry and gloucester over HKR bradford and castleford is massive,why dont you think the same?.

Bums on seats 'paying a proper price for the product' has clearly been irelevent over SKY tv money,how is that good long term?

A known and proven product is 100 times more valuable than an unknown. 

 

Where would the crowds come from to replace the thousands at the clubs you'd abandon?  The union clubs off-season or converts?  Didn't work too well with a very integrated Harlequins and it's not anywhere near RL heartlands that can gather crowds because it's a rugby league game.

 

Where would the backers come to keep the club going?  I read a couple of years ago that a typical Super League club needs an absolute minimum of £2m revenue per season to just keep the doors open, never mind succeed.  That's a lot of money to come from nowhere.  RU has many many examples of wannabe sugar daddies who aren't proper rugby union men who come in and can't buy success within a couple of seasons then walk away to their next toy or dramatically cut their funding.  HKR, Bradford and Cas all have sufficient incomes that they can scrape by with minimum investment (just, mind you).

 

Top end stadia that can take the big clubs and big games?

 

I could keep going but then you just need to look at London for the massive efforts, and financial backing, that has gone into a club that still struggles in what should really be a fertile recruiting ground for rugby league.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think the efforts that Bristol, Coventry and Gloucester have made to enhance and expand rugby league have been astonishing with all credit to the clubs, supporters and players BUT they're just not SL material and won't be for the foreseeable future.  Even if they were fast tracked then what would be left of the original club?  Nothing.  They'd have to replace every single player, the coaching staff, the management, ground and everything that went into building them into the proper rugby clubs that they are now.  I'd not want to sacrifice all of that work for a gamble on an unproven area with none of the infrastructure needed for SL level rugby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a couple of years ago that a typical Super League club needs an absolute minimum of £2m revenue per season to just keep the doors open...

In addition to the SKY money was that??

I've been picking up figures like Catalans and Leeds turning over £6M to £7M.

It's easy to play fantasy rugby league but when you do it with income and expenditure attached it reveals a very different story.

As will be the case with this supposed middle 8 league, the disparity in finance may well be enormous in that league......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to the SKY money was that??

I've been picking up figures like Catalans and Leeds turning over £6M to £7M.

It's easy to play fantasy rugby league but when you do it with income and expenditure attached it reveals a very different story.

As will be the case with this supposed middle 8 league, the disparity in finance may well be enormous in that league......

Yes.  Minimum SKY money + £2m revenue to keep the doors open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.  Minimum SKY money + £2m revenue to keep the doors open.

OK so clubs need £3.2M just to get through an SL season.

Many SL clubs are spending twice that.

Most CC clubs don't even manage £1M turnovers.

So the bottom line roughly is if you want to talk about CC clubs getting in SL they'll need to find at least a £Million a year just to come bottom.

Yes the Championships are truly a place where you can "build for Superleague".

Oddly enough there seems to be about eight clubs who can fund Superleague competitively, and six who merely tread water. The change to 2 x 12 and 3 x 8 seems to me to be a recognition that the finances are too unbalanced in SL hence the bottom clubs are unravelling. Being sent off mid season to play the championship clubs seems to be their punishment for not competing.

I feel sorry for the championship clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Irn Bru say sales in the North of England went up considerably when they sponsored RL? Which is obviously good, but it makes you wonder why they have stopped.

 

I do think the fact that RL fans are actually quite loyal to people that sponsor the game compared to other sports

 

 

Yep. I packed in John Players and Silk Cut years ago and haven't touched any Captain Morgan for even longer.

 

 

:drag:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Rolls Royce sponsor us I'll buy one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017