Commercial performance and sponsorship of SL

[DoubleD]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That isn't necessarily true.

The size of deal that we talk about in RL aren't necessarily the huge 5 year multi-million pound strategic sponsorship decisions.

For somebody like Specsavers they are probably just spending their couple of hundred grand elsewhere.

Yes, which would’ve been decided before Elstone and his team were in place

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Yes, which would’ve been decided before Elstone and his team were in place

Why?

Our business certainly don't make minor decisions like that so far in advance.

Better only decided the other day to sponsor WCC. Ronseal only just decided to sponsor the refs.

[DoubleD]

19 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Why?

Our business certainly don't make minor decisions like that so far in advance.

Better only decided the other day to sponsor WCC. Ronseal only just decided to sponsor the refs.

Most businesses don’t consider a couple of hundred grand as frivolous 

And how much extra incremental money do you think SL/RFL got from the extension of those deals? 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, DoubleD said:

Most businesses don’t consider a couple of hundred grand as frivolous 

And how much extra incremental money do you think SL/RFL got from the extension of those deals? 

Specsavers' sponsorship budget will be huge. The RL part of that will be tiny. 

Deals of a couple of hundred grand for major companies won't need to be decided a year in advance. 

The financial year thing is overstated when we discuss the size of deals we get.

[DoubleD]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Specsavers' sponsorship budget will be huge. The RL part of that will be tiny. 

Deals of a couple of hundred grand for major companies won't need to be decided a year in advance. 

The financial year thing is overstated when we discuss the size of deals we get.

You’re wrong on all counts but I’ll leave it at that 

[Dave T]

Just now, DoubleD said:

You’re wrong on all counts but I’ll leave it at that 

I have been involved in deals worth a couple of hundred grand done in shorter scales. We have seen sponsorships signed at short notice, in RL and elsewhere.

My point is based on fact.

Saying all companies decided their sponsorship for this year before Elstone joined SLE is simply not true and a bizarre point tbh.

[Chamey]

7 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

You’re wrong on all counts but I’ll leave it at that 

It depends on how the marketing department works surely? I know that a major supermarket decided to sponsor a top championship team (who played in the prem in the duration of the deal) as headline sponsors within a month of hearing the offer, despite having no plans to, just because the deal was good. 

While key sponsorships will be planned far in advance, there almost certainly will have been a misc fund, which the RFL's referee sponsorship deal could fit into many times over.

Plus Specsavers have form with somewhat last minute sponsorship: 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2018/04/24/ecb-close-finalising-home-test-series-sponsor-aimed-families/

https://www.cricketscotland.com/specsavers-to-sponsor-scotland-v-england-odi/

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Chamey said:

It depends on how the marketing department works surely? I know that Waitrose decided to sponsor Reading FC as headline within a month of hearing the offer, despite having no plans to, just because the deal was good. 

While key sponsorships will be planned far in advance, there almost certainly will have been a misc fund, which the RFL's referee sponsorship deal could fit into many times over.

Plus Specsavers have form with somewhat last minute sponsorship: 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2018/04/24/ecb-close-finalising-home-test-series-sponsor-aimed-families/

https://www.cricketscotland.com/specsavers-to-sponsor-scotland-v-england-odi/

I would have some sympathy with DD's point if the game had taken a change in strategy of taking scraps and were pushing and holding out for longer term major partnerships. 

But things like the WCC deal has shown that isn't the case.

[Damien]

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

There is something in what Chaney is saying though, but you are right, if you can just get some cold hard cash from selling the advertising space, this is a positive too.

But having fewer sponsors covering more assets isn't the model we should be aiming for.

Indeed diversification is key. A wide range of sponsors is very healthy and a positive sign. The same companies sponsoring everything certainly isn't and this is even more so when it is often a last minute cut price sponsorship deal because there is no one else.

[Damien]

32 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I have been involved in deals worth a couple of hundred grand done in shorter scales. We have seen sponsorships signed at short notice, in RL and elsewhere.

My point is based on fact.

Saying all companies decided their sponsorship for this year before Elstone joined SLE is simply not true and a bizarre point tbh.

I think if any company really wanted to sponsor a competition then they could wrap up a deal in no time at all. As you say the sums involved are small. The trouble is most companies aren't interested.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

This has always been the case with the WCC though. Its a one-off game, you can't really build a long term association with it and pretty much all the details are arranged pretty much at the last minute.

The sponsorship of the WCC isnt really a symptom of some sort of commercial failings from Elstone or SL. Its a symptom of a poorly organised competition that doesnt do itself justice. You could have the greatest commercial team in the world, its not going to sell the WCC in its current form for much more.

People are talking generally, not just the WCC. That wasn't even in my thinking.

[Gooleboy]

Fair point to give Elstone time, but as I said nothing of any note has happened under his tenure as of yet. Remember Lenaghan & Co were saying what a brave new world was ahead for Super League once they had got control. What is the strap line now, "New beginnings". 

[Chamey]

12 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Fair point to give Elstone time, but as I said nothing of any note has happened under his tenure as of yet. Remember Lenaghan & Co were saying what a brave new world was ahead for Super League once they had got control. What is the strap line now, "New beginnings". 

Yep, over 13 months ago, Pearson was banging on about how in 3 months time RL in the UK was going to be well on track to compete for no.2 sport, and how the new commercial control they'd acquire would change the game massively. The issue is that 10 months on from that starting point we have sfa.

[Dave T]

47 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im not sure why Betfred taking the WCC at short notice because they were already involved in the game is a big deal. Downer sponsored the Auckland 9s, Dacia were England sponsor, Heinz Big Soup were already sponsors, Gillette Sponsored England and the 4 nations, Carnegie sponsored the Challenge Cup.

This year is no different from any other really.

The number of partners is down on many of the other years. Three key partners have left RL (Ladbrokes, KP and Specsavers) one new one on board (Coral).

That isn't the same as other years.

[Lowdesert]

18 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Fair point to give Elstone time, but as I said nothing of any note has happened under his tenure as of yet. Remember Lenaghan & Co were saying what a brave new world was ahead for Super League once they had got control. What is the strap line now, "New beginnings". 

Expect instant impact from someone in a strategic role and on the whole you’ll be disappointed.  

Elstone, (and anyone else who could’ve taken the role), will be finding issues under every stone he turns over together with the complications of dealing with the SL CEOs.

SL CEOs who BTW, we’re supposed to be fully reviewing all the business disciplines (of which, you would think marketing/sponsorship would’ve been included) after Woods departure.  Unless I’ve missed it, that info has still to be released.

[Chamey]

22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The number of partners is down on many of the other years. Three key partners have left RL (Ladbrokes, KP and Specsavers) one new one on board (Coral).

That isn't the same as other years.

Coral and Ladbrokes are one and the same. So it’s 2 sponsors left, 0 joined. Plus we know that the Coral sponsorship is worth less than the Ladbrokes one (from £1m/yr to Seven figures over 2), so that’s 2 left, one scaled down!

[Gooleboy]

29 minutes ago, Chamey said:

Yep, over 13 months ago, Pearson was banging on about how in 3 months time RL in the UK was going to be well on track to compete for no.2 sport, and how the new commercial control they'd acquire would change the game massively. The issue is that 10 months on from that starting point we have sfa.

Yes when those SL Chairmen with their big ego's told us all that you would have expected something of note to have happened by now. Doesn't look  great when they have to get the begging bowl out for Betfred to put an additional few bob in so the WCC has a name to it. This is one of the few truly International events we have and they couldn't even get a new Sposnor for it. 

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Chamey said:

Coral and Ladbrokes are one and the same. So it’s 2 sponsors left, 0 joined. Plus we know that the Coral sponsorship is worth less than the Ladbrokes one (from £1m/yr to Seven figures over 2), so that’s 2 left, one scaled down!

Yes, although wasn't it stated here that we had a replacement to Ladbrokes pull out. So I was counting coral as a newbie.

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

All of those are RFL properties

 

KP, Ladbrokes and Specsavers all sponsored SL. They were the kind of deals that I was against, cross-subsidised deals where the RFL got a share. 

I look forward to a new SLE deal being signed at some stage, which is the point of the thread, as we always knew the RFL were poor didn't we?

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

Ladbrokes sponsored the challenge cup. Kingstone press sponsored the lower leagues and england, specsavers the referees.

All of those are RFL properties.

They all became partners of SL too. Two of those logos still appear on the SL website, think Ladbrokes were only pretty minor to be fair.

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im not sure that is anything other than an RFL footer. The SL website doesnt really exist (which is bad) its just a portal on the RFL site.

It is different. It is only on the SL section.

I'm not sure why you are so defensive over poor performance. If this was the RFL you wouldn't be. 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im not being defensive you have simply picked a very strange argument to make. 

That is that specsavers and Kingstone press were official partners and no longer are of Super League, and that Ladbrokes were but no longer are an official partner of the Betfred Super League and somehow this is evidence of Elstone and SL's failings to improve the commercial aspect of SL.

The fact is that Specsavers were and still are an official partner of the RFL, not SL. Kingstone Press were and still are an official partner of the RFL not SL. Ladbrokes were the the official sponsor of the challenge cup and not an official partner of SL.

Those parties are all still in exactly the same position as they were before.

https://www.kingstonepress.co.uk/rugby-league/

Note Kingstone Press being in their 4th year as a proud official partner of the RFL (not super league).

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/51716/specsavers-extend-partnership

Note the quote “It is fantastic news that Specsavers are continuing their partnership with the Rugby Football League for another year. " - Ralph RImmer.

Have a look at the SL Grand Final sponsor boards from the press conferences. We see there who has invested in sponsoring SL. Look atvthe same boards now. Those companies are now missing and haven't been replaced. 

Be as pedantic as you want, but the SLE sponsorship portfolio is worse than last year. 

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

They were and are RFL sponsors. Exactly as they were before.

Ladbrokes werent going to be an official partner of the betfred super league that much is obvious.

Kingstone press were an RFL sponsor, the title sponsors of the championship and league 1 and a partner of England. The have been replaced by betfred as title sponsors but are still partners of England and the RFL.

Specsavers were partners of the RFL and continue to be so.

Its not even that these companies werent SL sponsors or partners, its that they were RFL sponsors and partners and still are.

 

No, they are not still RFL partners.

Where are Specsavers getting coverage?

Edit: you do realise that the links you provided are a year out of date. You do, don't you?

[Chamey]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Erm, the Kingstone press website is their website today. Like right now.

So your complaint that Elstone and SL have failed to improve the commercial aspect of Super League is that Ronseal have replaced Specsavers as the RFL's match official sponsor and Kingstone press were an RFL partner and continue to be so?

 

It was a two year deal that has now finished, no statement announcing an extension has come out, hence it's probable that they just haven't got around to removing it yet.

http://www.astonmanor.co.uk/news/article/kingstone-press-becomes-principal-partner-of-england-rugby-league/

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Erm, the Kingstone press website is their website today. Like right now.

So your complaint that Elstone and SL have failed to improve the commercial aspect of Super League is that Ronseal have replaced Specsavers as the RFL's match official sponsor and Kingstone press were an RFL partner and continue to be so?

However will Elstone survive the RFL signing and maintaining their own sponsorship deals?

 

Hey, I'll leave you to your 2018 press releases.

Happy to agree to disagree that the SL commercial performance hasn't improved.