New Super League Sponsor

[Man of Kent]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

That is a really odd way of looking at it. Like, really odd. 

The value is the market value to SLE, which isn't just the cost of the ingredients, or what another local pizza place sells for. 

There is a cost for food that SLE clubs will have. It may be say, a tenner per head, times 25 people. If this covers that, that is the value, not £1.50 a pizza. 

So if it was a tenner a head x 25 that's £250 per team, £500 per match. Times 5 games per week. £2.5k. Times however many weeks. 

And I'm pretty sure that the cost for Pappa John's to make their pizza is not £1.50 anyway. 

Not odd at all.

The point is the cost to Papa John's to advertise with Super League is about £50 a game (it's quite easy to find reasonable info about how much a pizza costs to make for a national chain BTW). That's what I, er, takeaway from this deal.

[whatmichaelsays]

1 hour ago, EastLondonMike said:

Maybe someone can put a value on what the highlights package sponsorship and additional pitch side advertising should be, and more importantly, why it should be that value.

EDIT - UPDATED MATHS

A quick look suggests that St Helens charge £200 per game for LED pitchside advertising, so assume £1k a week for five televised games. It's worth noting that the prices quoted appear to have been released pre-COVID. Behind closed doors games may affect these values. 

As for the sponsorship of social media content, a typical CPM (cost per thousand) for YouTube pre-roll ads is around £6 (this is a VERY ball-park figure as there are a lot of variables, but we'll work with it). The highlights of the last round of fixtures have a total of 39,784 views combined which, at that assumed cost per thousand, would be around £240. 

So basically, you could argue that on those two aspects, Papa Johns would be on the hook for £1,250 per round. However, that assumes that:

• They wouldn't be offered lower than 'rack rate' pricing for a 'bulk purchase'.
• That the pricing of ad space hasn't been negatively impacted by the pandemic, which we know it has. 

I don't know how many pizzas Papa John's is providing, but in truth we're probably arguing over an amount that is probably in the ballpark of £1-1.5k per week at best. 

Has the deal been under-sold? Possibly. But there is equally an argument to be made that there is folly in passing up a offer (that in truth, costs the game little) for the opportunity cost of an account that could grow if we can prove that RL sponsorship has value. 

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Not odd at all.

The point is the cost to Papa John's to advertise with Super League is about £50 a game (it's quite easy to find reasonable info about how much a pizza costs to make for a national chain BTW). That's what I, er, takeaway from this deal.

So you now need to work out how much it costs SL to flash up the Papa Johns ad a few times. It's probably pennies. 

But that isn't how value of deals is worked out.

[Man of Kent]

Just now, Dave T said:

But that isn't how value of deals is worked out.

This is an exceedingly simple matter of what Papa John's is paying for prominent Super League advertising. I cannot believe an intelligent person such as yourself would believe this is a good deal so I'm guessing you're just taking a contrary position for the LOLs.  

[Man of Kent]

6 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

A quick look suggests that St Helens charge £200 per game for LED pitchside advertising, so assume £1k a week for five televised games. It's worth noting that the prices quoted appear to have been released pre-COVID. Behind closed doors games may affect these values. 

As for the sponsorship of social media content, a typical CPM (cost per thousand) for YouTube pre-roll ads is around £6 (this is a VERY ball-park figure as there are a lot of variables, but we'll work with it). The highlights of the last round of fixtures have a total of 39,784 views combined which, at that assumed cost per thousand, would be around £6,600. 

So basically, you could argue that on those two aspects, Papa Johns would be on the hook for £7,600 per round. However, that assumes that:

• They wouldn't be offered lower than 'rack rate' pricing for a 'bulk purchase'.
• That the pricing of ad space hasn't been negatively impacted by the pandemic, which we know it has. 

I don't know how many pizzas Papa John's is providing, but in truth we're probably arguing over an amount that is probably in the ballpark of £6-8k per week. 

Good work.

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

A quick look suggests that St Helens charge £200 per game for LED pitchside advertising, so assume £1k a week for five televised games. It's worth noting that the prices quoted appear to have been released pre-COVID. Behind closed doors games may affect these values. 

As for the sponsorship of social media content, a typical CPM (cost per thousand) for YouTube pre-roll ads is around £6 (this is a VERY ball-park figure as there are a lot of variables, but we'll work with it). The highlights of the last round of fixtures have a total of 39,784 views combined which, at that assumed cost per thousand, would be around £6,600. 

So basically, you could argue that on those two aspects, Papa Johns would be on the hook for £7,600 per round. However, that assumes that:

• They wouldn't be offered lower than 'rack rate' pricing for a 'bulk purchase'.
• That the pricing of ad space hasn't been negatively impacted by the pandemic, which we know it has. 

I don't know how many pizzas Papa John's is providing, but in truth we're probably arguing over an amount that is probably in the ballpark of £6-8k per week. 

Could you explain the cost per thousand calculations there mate? £6.6k seems high for 40k views.

 

[Dave T]

Just now, Man of Kent said:

This is an exceedingly simple matter of what Papa John's is paying for prominent Super League advertising. I cannot believe an intelligent person such as yourself would believe this is a good deal so I'm guessing you're just taking a contrary position for the LOLs.  

I'm surprised you and others who are generating seemingly faux outrage to have a go at SLE have never heard of contra deals.

I mean seriously, working out the price of dough? Come on.

[whatmichaelsays]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Could you explain the cost per thousand calculations there mate? £6.6k seems high for 40k views.

 

Actualy, my maths is way off. 39.784k views at £6 per thousand is £238. Post corrected. Cheers

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Actualy, my maths is off by a factor of a few zeros. 39.784k views at £6 per thousand is £238. Post corrected.

Thanks, I thought so but wasn't sure if I was missing something.

So it looks like the value to Papa Johns is pretty modest, as is the value to SLE?

On the positive it must be one of the most discussed low value supplier deals in SL history.

[whatmichaelsays]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Thanks, I thought so but wasn't sure if I was missing something.

So it looks like the value to Papa Johns is pretty modest, as is the value to SLE?

On the positive it must be one of the most discussed low value supplier deals in SL history.

Assuming the LED pitchside rack rate at St Helens (multiplied by five), plus the value of pre-roll ads on Super League content,  you're probably looking at (best case scenario) a value of £2500-£3000 per round. Or 166 large double pepperonis.

Which really does highlight how people are looking at this problem in entirely the wrong way. The real problem is why RL can only provide £2,500-£3,000 worth of value to a potential sponsor.

[Man of Kent]

11 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm surprised you and others who are generating seemingly faux outrage to have a go at SLE have never heard of contra deals.

I mean seriously, working out the price of dough? Come on.

It's only a good deal if it leads to a paying deal. But we know that those don't always materialise once you essentially give it away. 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Assuming the LED pitchside rack rate at St Helens (multiplied by five), plus the value of pre-roll ads on Super League content,  you're probably looking at (best case scenario) a value of £2500-£3000 per round. Or 166 large double pepperonis.

And if we use the methodology of some detractors, the cost to SLE is pretty much nothing, assuming they are owned assets and not through agencies. 

It really is a minor supplier sponsorship, I'm not sure why anyone has an issue with it or why on earth it has made so much noise.

[Man of Kent]

6 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Assuming the LED pitchside rack rate at St Helens (multiplied by five), plus the value of pre-roll ads on Super League content,  you're probably looking at (best case scenario) a value of £2500-£3000 per round. Or 166 large double pepperonis.

Which really does highlight how people are looking at this problem in entirely the wrong way. The real problem is why RL can only provide £2,500-£3,000 worth of value to a potential sponsor.

That would pay a salary at Super League Europe. Ho hum.

[EastLondonMike]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

It's only a good deal if it leads to a paying deal. But we know that those don't always materialise once you essentially give it away. 

Which would be the goal im sure. A paying deal. And if the engagement with fans is a successful one i'm sure that would be forthcoming.

Theres no reason to think it wouldn't.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

It's only a good deal if it leads to a paying deal. But we know that those don't always materialise once you essentially give it away. 

That isn't how it works at all.

About 20 years ago I worked for a company who supplied some services for Warrington - the payment was in advertising boards. No cash came anywhere near being exchanged, but Warrington had this service that they would otherwise have had to spend cash on, and the company I worked for got some awareness (in reality it was a vanity thing as there was no value in the ad boards).

Good deals can be had without cash changing hands.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Man of Kent said:

That would pay a salary at Super League Europe. Ho hum.

Can you pay a salary in digital adverts?

You do see that SLE are not paying cash?

[Man of Kent]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That isn't how it works at all.

About 20 years ago I worked for a company who supplied some services for Warrington - the payment was in advertising boards. No cash came anywhere near being exchanged, but Warrington had this service that they would otherwise have had to spend cash on, and the company I worked for got some awareness (in reality it was a vanity thing as there was no value in the ad boards).

Good deals can be had without cash changing hands.

So you do think this is a good deal?

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

So you do think this is a good deal?

I don't feel strongly either way, we don't have the details. But I do know there is a lot of ignorance in the criticism of it.

If we had a post-match food cost of say £30k that we now no longer have, that is surely to be welcomed?

[M j M]

5 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

So you do think this is a good deal?

It's a very typical deal that people who have no understanding of how the business of sport works seem to think is outrageous.

[Man of Kent]

21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If we had a post-match food cost of say £30k that we now no longer have, that is surely to be welcomed?

Since when has it been the responsibility of a governing body to feed the players? 

The truth is - as it stands - it's a pathetic deal that sends a message that you can sponsor & advertise with the flagship comp of British RL for the cost of a few pizzas. It's deserving of all the criticism it's getting. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Since when has it been the responsibility of a governing body to feed the players? 

The truth is - as it stands - it's a pathetic deal that sends a message that you can sponsor & advertise with the flagship comp of British RL for the cost of a few pizzas. It's deserves all the criticism it's getting. 

I'm not sure of your point - if SLE signs a deal, the money goes to the clubs. 

You may think it is a low value deal, that is fine, but some of your arguments - the price of dough, paying an employee in digital billboards and now claiming that the value does not go to clubs are just odd.

It doesn't need any more than saying it is too cheap.

[Man of Kent]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure of your point - if SLE signs a deal, the money goes to the clubs. 

You may think it is a low value deal, that is fine, but some of your arguments - the price of dough, paying an employee in digital billboards and now claiming that the value does not go to clubs are just odd.

It doesn't need any more than saying it is too cheap.

So it's a bad deal, then. Agreed!

[whatmichaelsays]

14 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

sends a message that you can sponsor & advertise with the flagship comp of British RL for the cost of a few pizzas.

Because, even if you make some generous assumptions, the numbers show that that's all that Super League sponsorship is worth, given the value we provide to those sponsors. 

You can blame SL for this "deal", or you can attack the real problem - that RL sponsorship is a fundamentally poor business proposition due to what we can offer those sponsors. 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

So it's a bad deal, then. Agreed!

If you want to have a discussion, happy to oblige. If you want to be a troll, I'm not interested.

[Man of Kent]

2 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Because, even if you make some generous assumptions, the numbers show that that's all that Super League sponsorship is worth, given the value we provide to those sponsors. 

You can blame SL for this "deal", or you can attack the real problem - that RL sponsorship is a fundamentally poor business proposition due to what we can offer those sponsors. 

That's quite a leap from this obviously poor deal. Isn't the Betfred sponsorship worth around £1m?