2019 kits (Merged Threads)

[Shaggy]

I can get what they're trying to do with the Wire away shirt. It looks like the scruffy gym wear that the young people are all wearing nowadays.

The real issue is the shorts.

What the...?

[Dave T]

29 minutes ago, Shaggy said:

I can get what they're trying to do with the Wire away shirt. It looks like the scruffy gym wear that the young people are all wearing nowadays.

The real issue is the shorts.

What the...?

I think it could have been fine as a training shirt, as you say it would look fine in the gym. I don't think the shorts are any worse than the rest of the

[Tonka]

6 hours ago, RP London said:

who is the target audience that that description is aimed at????

Melange lovers

[RP London]

26 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Melange lovers

I mean its nice and all but not sure anyone would say they loved it... 

[Sydney Hornets]

Canberra's jersey's for next year are magnificent.

https://twitter.com/TheGHRaiders/status/1062956339134001157 

[Sydney Hornets]

[deluded pom?]

6 minutes ago, Sydney Hornets said:

Canberra's jersey's for next year are magnificent.

https://twitter.com/TheGHRaiders/status/1062956339134001157 

I wouldn’t quite go that far. Why two different shades of green? IIRC the original Raiders’ shirts were lime green.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

Do Canberra not have a main sponsor then??

[gnidir]

Call me cynical. But I just don't understand the need for the sponsor placement of jerseys lately. I understand the need for many sponsors because they can't attract good ones at the right value, but does it have to look so much like a race driver?

Surely its not that hard for the clubs to sort it out?

 

[The Hallucinating Goose]

3 hours ago, gnidir said:

I understand the need for many sponsors because they can't attract good ones at the right value

What do you mean can't attract good sponsors?? We've had some world class ones recently, we've had a car dealership, a scaffolding firm, this year we've got a company that does concrete flooring and nationwide as well, not just local, name of the company escapes me...... 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

3 hours ago, gnidir said:

Call me cynical. But I just don't understand the need for the sponsor placement of jerseys lately. I understand the need for many sponsors because they can't attract good ones at the right value, but does it have to look so much like a race driver?

Surely its not that hard for the clubs to sort it out?

 

That looks pretty cool - and I agree entirely this is what SL and the clubs should be doing. Would probably have the SL logo monochrome (although I'm sure you just mocked this to show what it could look like) but overall that's a much smarter looking Jersey!

[Oliver Clothesoff]

3 hours ago, gnidir said:

Call me cynical. But I just don't understand the need for the sponsor placement of jerseys lately. I understand the need for many sponsors because they can't attract good ones at the right value, but does it have to look so much like a race driver?

Surely its not that hard for the clubs to sort it out?

 

Clubs then lose valuable sponsorship money if they tone it down and no Super League clubs can really afford to do that. 

[gnidir]

20 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Clubs then lose valuable sponsorship money if they tone it down and no Super League clubs can really afford to do that. 

I dont agree.

Logos on jerseys is a small part of a corporate partnership these days. Media exposure through social channels and community engagement goes far further. The value of the Sky exposure actually devalues the jersey sponsor. (You aren't on tv for 80 minutes each week)

The logo placement is about exposure. There is no value in fans walking around Warrington for instance for any multinational. 

As I said, I understand Superleague clubs dont know how to attract larger companies, but your brand perception raises your value as a club. 

That mock up actually gives more exposure to the same companies.

Chest sponsor is designed to be captured in TV interviews. Main chest is traditional , but badly placed in rugby because the ball is always in the way for still media. Manufacturer doesn't actually gain by having a big logo beyond people knowing they make the kit (Example, look at minimal Nike branding in the NFL), and the sleeve sponsors actually get most still media exposure.

My whole issue is that Superleague , as far as I know, doesn't even look at these things, instead they sell as much real estate as they can, but that sacrifices the clubs own brand perception. If you look cheap, people think that you are.

So, by just sorting out the clutter, clubs could at least make something less noisey, without sacrificing the number of sponsors, or the exposure given to them.

By doing that, you would probably raise sales of merchandise as a revenue stream .

[EastLondonMike]

Multiple branding on apparel is actually a big trend at the moment, which has come from the world of sports and largely motorsports, so interesting that some see it as a negative to have so much branding on things like jerseys.

I think its a generational thing. 

Placement of branding on a jersey is all about exposure, and what they're willing to pay for the space available. A lot of sports teams i work with have guidelines that restrict the size of certain sponsor branding (unless they're willing to pay a premium).

One critique i would level at a lot of RL teams is they don't seem to think about how the additional sponsor branding will work into their jerseys, which can be the difference between looking good and looking tacky. Some times maybe it's down to timings of a sponsor coming on board, but still think more attention should be made. Guess that comes down to the fact the sport has no real creative involved at a senior level (yet).

[hunsletgreenandgold]

1 hour ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Clubs then lose valuable sponsorship money if they tone it down and no Super League clubs can really afford to do that. 

Reckon they more than make up for it with more shirt sales they're likely to get. Also, it's not taking the sponsors off - just positioning them smarter which I get might command less if not on the front but as I say I really believe additional shirts sales will offset that and then some. 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, gnidir said:

I dont agree.

Logos on jerseys is a small part of a corporate partnership these days. Media exposure through social channels and community engagement goes far further. The value of the Sky exposure actually devalues the jersey sponsor. (You aren't on tv for 80 minutes each week)

The logo placement is about exposure. There is no value in fans walking around Warrington for instance for any multinational. 

As I said, I understand Superleague clubs dont know how to attract larger companies, but your brand perception raises your value as a club. 

That mock up actually gives more exposure to the same companies.

Chest sponsor is designed to be captured in TV interviews. Main chest is traditional , but badly placed in rugby because the ball is always in the way for still media. Manufacturer doesn't actually gain by having a big logo beyond people knowing they make the kit (Example, look at minimal Nike branding in the NFL), and the sleeve sponsors actually get most still media exposure.

My whole issue is that Superleague , as far as I know, doesn't even look at these things, instead they sell as much real estate as they can, but that sacrifices the clubs own brand perception. If you look cheap, people think that you are.

So, by just sorting out the clutter, clubs could at least make something less noisey, without sacrificing the number of sponsors, or the exposure given to them.

By doing that, you would probably raise sales of merchandise as a revenue stream .

I'm not really sure of the point you are making here, it all seems a bit muddled.

You say logos on jerseys are a small part, but then talk about logos on jerseys. I'm not sure why you think O'Neills would be happy with their logo being tucked away, when every other manufacturer wants their brand on the chest or breast - this is the case in all major UK sports. Why is the shoulder more valuable than the chest, what is that based on?

On the two mock-ups, on a front on view I can only see 3 company names, versus 5 spaces on the official kit (two spaces are used for the same company). They also still have the shoulders and arms available. 

By the way, I don't disagree with the principle, it looks rubbish, but company names on shirts are becoming more and more prominent, even on football shirts.

[Rupert Prince]

On 11/15/2018 at 9:02 AM, RP London said:

like the home kit.

is the away kit supposed to be wolves fur? not great..

Great kit, pity about the tatoos.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Reckon they more than make up for it with more shirt sales they're likely to get. Also, it's not taking the sponsors off - just positioning them smarter which I get might command less if not on the front but as I say I really believe additional shirts sales will offset that and then some. 

To be fair, they will have the stats for that. They will have sales numbers before sponsors and after.

I don't believe it would lead to a major spike tbh, but that is just a hunch.

[Rupert Prince]

On 11/15/2018 at 9:04 AM, RP London said:

who is the target audience that that description is aimed at????

Judges from Strictly Come Dancing?

[Wholly Trinity]

Subtle sponsor placement on Bandung (Java) FC's kit. 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

To be fair, they will have the stats for that. They will have sales numbers before sponsors and after.

I don't believe it would lead to a major spike tbh, but that is just a hunch.

I'm not sure they will have stats - most likely they'll just be doing what RL always does, short sighted, get whatever money they can. 

It's clear SL clubs get told they're allowed 'X' amount of sponsors in specific positions and it seems to me clubs priority is to fill them regardless of how it looks on the jersey. I can imagine the below looked great when Kappa passed it to Salford......then the sponsor slots got filled and we end up with the club logo being smaller than the sponsors. This must be having a significant impact on shirt sales. 

 

 

[Rupert Prince]

12 hours ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

Do Canberra not have a main sponsor then??

My wife had a Huawei phone that was rubbish,  wisely went back to Samsung in the end.

Choosing a sensible colour on a mainly plain background is not a bad idea.  

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

I'm not sure they will have stats - most likely they'll just be doing what RL always does, short sighted, get whatever money they can. 

It's clear SL clubs get told they're allowed 'X' amount of sponsors in specific positions and it seems to me clubs priority is to fill them regardless of how it looks on the jersey. I can imagine the below looked great when Kappa passed it to Salford......then the sponsor slots got filled and we end up with the club logo being smaller than the sponsors. This must be having a significant impact on shirt sales. 

 

 

We need to be careful not to just make the base assumption that everything RL does is wrong or badly thought out. The stats I refer to are really basic income and numbers from shirt sales and from shirt sponsorship. 

More clubs are putting more sponsors on in all sports. You could argue we have led the way here.

Maybe not aesthetically pleasing, but we have to assume they haven't harmed sales to any great extent otherwise they would be pulled back if it didn't make financial sense.

[hunsletgreenandgold]

18 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We need to be careful not to just make the base assumption that everything RL does is wrong or badly thought out. The stats I refer to are really basic income and numbers from shirt sales and from shirt sponsorship. 

More clubs are putting more sponsors on in all sports. You could argue we have led the way here.

Maybe not aesthetically pleasing, but we have to assume they haven't harmed sales to any great extent otherwise they would be pulled back if it didn't make financial sense.

I just think that even if they have raw stats, if they saw a decline in shirt sales no (or little) research would be done to find out what was attributed to that. 

I agree other sports are having more sponsors but they all seem to understand that anything in addition to the initial kit design has to be in-keeping with it. The NRL seem to understand that too - SL not so much. 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

1 hour ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Reckon they more than make up for it with more shirt sales they're likely to get. Also, it's not taking the sponsors off - just positioning them smarter which I get might command less if not on the front but as I say I really believe additional shirts sales will offset that and then some. 

Highly doubt it. 

People seem to be more out off by the design of the shirt, the quality of the material used and the actual material used rather than a shirt having five sponsors on it.