Sponsorship in Rugby League.

[Stainesrover]

Having watched the Autumn series Rugby Union internationals over the last month, I couldn't help but notice the difference in sponsorship companies between League and Union.

Years ago RL had some very big blue chip companies sponsor the sport on so many levels, companies like ICI, British Coal, Gillette, Silk Cut and many Breweries/Alcohol etc.

I can't understand why our sport is so reliant on a small handful of people for sponsorship, the main one being Betfred. Otherwise it's slim pickings. 

Union seem to manage to get some serious money coming through many companies from many different spectrums, from Insurance, Betting, Vehicle companies. I'm sure in RL in the UK had a team of people to really go at it and knock on as many doors as possible to attract some sponsorship from companies. Fred Done is getting a cracking deal at the moment, Betfred (with Glens and ABK) are the only 3 companies that seem to be on show.

With the amount of coverage out sport now gets, with every game televised not only on SKY but free to air, I would say that there is plenty of eyes on our sport 

 

Edited November 27, 2024 by Stainesrover
New info

[Dullish Mood]

Demographics.  Next question.

[sweaty craiq]

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

[The Masked Poster]

21 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

I think this is a big part of it. Thinking differently won't automatically mean sponsors are queuing up to join in but the "we're a small sport watched by skint people " approach doesn't really do us any favours. 

The powers that be in the UK game need to go on the Vegas trip and see what a bit of pizzazz and confidence can do for you. 

[Hanover XIII]

13 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

I would definitely look at holiday/airline companies. Even regionally we're served by several airports flying millions of people to holiday destinations with the likes of Ryanair, easyJet, Jet2 etc operating out of them. From the UK we made about 60 million trips to Europe and spent 50bn on holidays in 2023. It's a huge, competitive market and, like you say, we're all in that market during the year.

[Hugh Jarce]

3 minutes ago, Hanover XIII said:

I would definitely look at holiday/airline companies. Even regionally we're served by several airports flying millions of people to holiday destinations with the likes of Ryanair, easyJet, Jet2 etc operating out of them. From the UK we made about 60 million trips to Europe and spent 50bn on holidays in 2023. It's a huge, competitive market and, like you say, we're all in that market during the year.

Airlines is a good shout, especially with Catalan in the league and the number of traveling fans.

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Dullish Mood said:

Demographics.  Next question.

That’s a cop out. 

[Eddie]

47 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

Agreed, it makes me cringe how RL TV programming often starts with a montage of stuff like chimneys and pits. People on this forum often make out RL fans are the poorest people in the country too, are Wigan Warriors fans really less well off then Wigan Athletic fans? 

[M j M]

Jet2 have a huge marketing budget, they've sponsored Leeds a few times in the past but would be a great fit for the wider league.

[whatmichaelsays]

Couple of things going on here. 

Marketing budgets as a whole are now more fragmented - they're spread across far more channels than before. Over the last couple of decades, a lot of budget that was spent on "brand" related advertising (known in the trade as "above the line"), such as TV, radio, outdoor media and sports sponsorship, has been diverted into "performance" advertising (below the line), such as digital, search engine marketing, programmatic, customer loyalty, affiliates and stuff like that. Companies have done this partly because it's cheaper, but also because it is much more traceable and delivers  faster short-term returns (we'll ignore the impact on long-term). 

That means that on your options for sponsorship, the pool is reducing to advertisers who either:

• Still see the value of brand marketing
• Are doing it for altruistic or CSR reasons
• Are trying to reach an audience that is harder to reach through performance marketing
• Are trying to reach an audience that is harder to reach through other brand marketing channels
• Are doing it for vanity
• A combination of the above.

So the question for RL is whether it is serving those needs for those "higher tier" sponsors, and that's where the sport probably lacks - some reasons of its own making, and other less so.

For example, I don't know how many extra mortgages or savings account Leeds Building Society have sold off the back of their partnership with the Rhinos, and I suspect that they don't fully know either. But they probably do get a lot of value from the partnership from a branding perspective due to the TV coverage Leeds offers, as well as good CSR benefit as a local brand and employer.

Would, however, someone like Allianz or Investec, who are in a similar industry, get the same value? I suspect not - they can probably afford more media than LBS, they probably could reach the Leeds Rhinos audience fairly easily if they needed to without being partnered with the Rhinos, and they don't really get the vanity / client entertaining credibility that they get from a box at Twickenham. 

I don't think this is an issue of poor salesmanship or lack of effort. It comes down to more engrained, long-term issues. We don't offer the sort of prestige or image that other sports (RU, golf, F1) offer to make RL sponsorship a big draw for big brands. We don't give them access to audiences that they couldn't reach through means that are more cost-effective and more attributable (and this isn't just a "we don't reach enough CEO's issue - you can make the same argument that we don't appeal to sponsors that are trying to reach younger audiences). We often don't project the right image that makes brands comfortable in associating with us (to use a simplistic example, who I want my brand name in the background when Deggsy is offering someone out on Twitter?)

It's not all bad - the sport is improving in some areas. For the people who still see women's or disability sport as a waste of time, I'd point to some of the big names that are only involved in RL through those formats and the image / CSR benefits they provide (Nuffield Health and Engie at Leeds, for example) - and even more examples in women's football and netball. But it's also a mistake to just blame this as a failure of salesmanship - it's a much bigger question of what the sport of is offering those prospective partners. 

Edited November 27, 2024 by whatmichaelsays

[Hugh Jarce]

26 minutes ago, M j M said:

Jet2 have a huge marketing budget, they've sponsored Leeds a few times in the past but would be a great fit for the wider league.

Leeds Bradford Airport is one of their major partners too.

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Couple of things going on here. 

Marketing budgets as a whole are now more fragmented - they're spread across far more channels than before. Over the last couple of decades, a lot of budget that was spent on "brand" related advertising (known in the trade as "above the line"), such as TV, radio, outdoor media and sports sponsorship, has been diverted into "performance" advertising (below the line), such as digital, search engine marketing, programmatic, customer loyalty, affiliates and stuff like that. Companies have done this partly because it's cheaper, but also because it is much more traceable and delivers  faster short-term returns (we'll ignore the impact on long-term). 

That means that on your options for sponsorship, the pool is reducing to advertisers who either:

• Still see the value of brand marketing
• Are doing it for altruistic or CSR reasons
• Are trying to reach an audience that is harder to reach through performance marketing
• Are trying to reach an audience that is harder to reach through other brand marketing channels
• Are doing it for vanity
• A combination of the above.

So the question for RL is whether it is serving those needs for those "higher tier" sponsors, and that's where the sport probably lacks - some reasons of its own making, and other less so.

For example, I don't know how many extra mortgages or savings account Leeds Building Society have sold off the back of their partnership with the Rhinos, and I suspect that they don't fully know either. But they probably do get a lot of value from the partnership from a branding perspective due to the TV coverage Leeds offers, as well as good CSR benefit as a local brand and employer.

Would, however, someone like Allianz or Investec, who are in a similar industry, get the same value? I suspect not - they can probably afford more media than LBS, they probably could reach the Leeds Rhinos audience fairly easily if they needed to without being partnered with the Rhinos, and they don't really get the vanity / client entertaining credibility that they get from a box at Twickenham. 

I don't think this is an issue of poor salesmanship or lack of effort. It comes down to more engrained, long-term issues. We don't offer the sort of prestige or image that other sports (RU, golf, F1) offer to make RL sponsorship a big draw for big brands. We don't give them access to audiences that they couldn't reach through means that are more cost-effective and more attributable (and this isn't just a "we don't reach enough CEO's issue - you can make the same argument that we don't appeal to sponsors that are trying to reach younger audiences). We often don't project the right image that makes brands comfortable in associating with us (to use a simplistic example, who I want my brand name in the background when Deggsy is offering someone out on Twitter?)

It's not all bad - the sport is improving in some areas. For the people who still see women's or disability sport as a waste of time, I'd point to some of the big names that are only involved in RL through those formats and the image / CSR benefits they provide (Nuffield Health and Engie at Leeds, for example) - and even more examples in women's football and netball. But it's also a mistake to just blame this as a failure of salesmanship - it's a much bigger question of what the sport of is offering those prospective partners. 

I'm happy to bow  to your knowledge in this area and tend to agree with what you're saying here. 
But I also think it's a bit chicken and egg. As in, what came first, the lack of prestigious national and international partners, or the thinking that we're just a small time affair and who wants teams from other places anyway, that leads to such a ghettoised mentality?

I wouldn't put the blame on Fred Bloggs, who works in RL marketing and struggles to sell the game to Tag-Heur or Rolex, I'd say it's more of a result of reaping what you sow over the years. 

I'd suggest the ship has sailed with regard to RL becoming seen as desirable by big or trendy sponsors. Sadly. 

Edited November 27, 2024 by The Masked Poster

[whatmichaelsays]

44 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

I'm happy to bow  to your knowledge in this area and tend to agree with what you're saying here. 
But I also think it's a bit chicken and egg. As in, what came first, the lack of prestigious national and international partners, or the thinking that we're just a small time affair and who wants teams from other places anyway, that leads to such a ghettoised mentality?

I wouldn't put the blame on Fred Bloggs, who works in RL marketing and struggles to sell the game to Tag-Heur or Rolex, I'd say it's more of a result of reaping what you sow over the years. 

I'd suggest the ship has sailed with regard to RL becoming seen as desirable by big or trendy sponsors. Sadly. 

I wouldn't necessarily say it's "chicken and egg" as such, but about ensuring that we're delivering what potential partners want. 

For me it starts with questions like "who would be our ideal commercial partners today?" (in other words, what is a good, attainable brand?) and "who would be our ideal commercial partners in 3, 5 and 10 years time?" (in other words, what is a brand we'd aspire to have in our portfolio?).

The answers to those questions then lead you onto looking at whether we have a good proposition for those brands, and whether we offer a level of value that they can't get from elsewhere.

So for the first question, Jet2 has been offered as an example and it's a good one. If we aspire to have Jet2 investing (for argument's sake) £1m of their marketing budget into SL, what is SL offering them that they can't get from investing that £1m elsewhere? If we're just offering some brand exposure and access to our audience, I'd respectfully suggest that isn't enough, because they can buy that on YouTube, Facebook and in the middle of Coronation Street. That critical approach helps to refine the proposition. 

The answer for the second question then helps to determine the direction that SL should take its marketing in the future to determine who the growth audience segments are. So if we want to appeal to more youth-focused brands, we need to shift the approach to ensure that we have more of that demographic in our audience. Similarly, if we want brands like BMW and Investec, we need to make ourself more appealing to those sorts of audiences. 

It's not necessarily about a discussion on whether we end up with BMW or Betfred, or Mercedes or Mushy Peas, but about being quite clear on the sorts of partners that are attainable, can add real value to SL and - most importantly - the sorts of partners that SL can add real value to. I don't think the sport does enough of that and to be honest, it's the same with our TV rights. So many people think Sky should be paying more for SL rights "just because they should", and don't really suggest what RL might offer in return for that premium. What has SL done since the last record rights deal to justify being paid even more? 

Edited November 27, 2024 by whatmichaelsays

[graveyard johnny]

3 hours ago, Hanover XIII said:

I would definitely look at holiday/airline companies. 

 

[Big Picture]

4 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

Cheap and skint is the reality though, as all the moaning about ticket prices for the recent World Cup proved.  Those prices weren't really that high for an event of that type, but still high enough to put regular fans off and/or be unaffordable for those regular fans.

[whatmichaelsays]

7 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Cheap and skint is the reality though, as all the moaning about ticket prices for the recent World Cup proved. 

I think it's more nuanced than that, and ties into the fact the RL is selling to too-small a pool of punters. 

If you held a football or RU event in this country, you'd have millions of people who want tickets but are left disappointed in ballots. Demand would outstrip supply and that means that those tournaments aren't relying on a small number of people (and therefore, a small number of incomes) buying large volumes of tickets in the way that RL does.  

RU would be trying to sell one ticket to four people. RL is trying to sell four tickets to one person, and that's the big issue. The four RU fans each fighting for one ticket each have their own income, whereas the the RL fan is likely buying four tickets out of just one income. That makes RL look expensive to the RL fan because even though the tickets might be 1/4 the price, it's proportionally a bigger investment both in terms of financial and physical commitment. 

[Dave T]

34 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I think it's more nuanced than that, and ties into the fact the RL is selling to too-small a pool of punters. 

If you held a football or RU event in this country, you'd have millions of people who want tickets but are left disappointed in ballots. Demand would outstrip supply and that means that those tournaments aren't relying on a small number of people (and therefore, a small number of incomes) buying large volumes of tickets in the way that RL does.  

RU would be trying to sell one ticket to four people. RL is trying to sell four tickets to one person, and that's the big issue. The four RU fans each fighting for one ticket each have their own income, whereas the the RL fan is likely buying four tickets out of just one income. That makes RL look expensive to the RL fan because even though the tickets might be 1/4 the price, it's proportionally a bigger investment both in terms of financial and physical commitment. 

There is also the really quite simple point on the RLWC that the prices were quite simply a rip off. They were charging prices that weren't the market value for an RL event at any level. We can add a premium for a WC factor, but you really can't just take an event that you normally sell for £15-20 and stick a £70 price tag on it. It doesn't work, and it didn't work.

Value and perception is important here. I've spent a fortune on music gigs, and have just spent £220 to watch a theatre show in a few weeks for 3 of us, but I understand that's the market rate for these events. 

Dutton and his team arrogantly stuck a hefty price tag on the WC tickets after years of selling internationals at bargain prices and then appeared surprised when they played in front of empty grounds. They treated people like idiots.

So I agree, we have too small a pool in the first place, but a big issue is we don't even serve the current pool well.

We can't just fixing things by believing more, or having more faith in RL. We have to make the product better (and I don't mean shot clocks or 7 tackle sets).

Edited November 27, 2024 by Dave T

[Damien]

41 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There is also the really quite simple point on the RLWC that the prices were quite simply a rip off. They were charging prices that weren't the market value for an RL event at any level. We can add a premium for a WC factor, but you really can't just take an event that you normally sell for £15-20 and stick a £70 price tag on it. It doesn't work, and it didn't work.

Value and perception is important here. I've spent a fortune on music gigs, and have just spent £220 to watch a theatre show in a few weeks for 3 of us, but I understand that's the market rate for these events. 

Dutton and his team arrogantly stuck a hefty price tag on the WC tickets after years of selling internationals at bargain prices and then appeared surprised when they played in front of empty grounds. They treated people like idiots.

So I agree, we have too small a pool in the first place, but a big issue is we don't even serve the current pool well.

We can't just fixing things by believing more, or having more faith in RL. We have to make the product better (and I don't mean shot clocks or 7 tackle sets).

Certainly not when that is coupled with playing the games at bog standard SL grounds.

[Dave T]

16 minutes ago, Damien said:

Certainly not when that is coupled with playing the games at bog standard SL grounds.

Yeah, that's part of the 'product' point - facilities and event feel are a huge part of that, and there has never been an event staged at Halliwell Jones or similar that has a value of £70 for a seat.

I'm a huge international sport fan, but these events were lesser than a standard SL game in the same grounds.

[sweaty craiq]

It’s emperors clothes mentality - tell people it’s poop and guess what they think. Start with the bells on Sky eg Salford v Leigh play off was bouncing and physical with defences aggressive and on top. What does the coffee grinder say “ in a game of little quality” FFS, RU commentators make - set bind engage repeat- sound exciting. Start again with a strategy of talking it up

[Dave T]

44 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

It’s emperors clothes mentality - tell people it’s poop and guess what they think. Start with the bells on Sky eg Salford v Leigh play off was bouncing and physical with defences aggressive and on top. What does the coffee grinder say “ in a game of little quality” FFS, RU commentators make - set bind engage repeat- sound exciting. Start again with a strategy of talking it up

What does that actually mean? 

Who is telling people it's poop? Sky aren't, SL aren't, IMG aren't, the clubs aren't.

Well, actually, the odd owner here and there does.

[Hopie]

7 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:

Northern mentality - we believe the sheeite we are told and forget to sell our strengths. RL pins itself to the we are cheap and skint banner. Reality is we spend plenty on product, have huge disposable income, drive quality cars, go on plenty holidays, etc but are constantly fed how downtrodden and penniless we all are - we need to fish in the better ponds but that starts at the top

I'm sure if all things are true all the data will prove that, then SL commercial can present it to sponsors to break the stereotypes, but it isn't true so they won't. Facts can't be overcome by strength of will, if sponsors want to reach different demographics then the game needs to attract them first.

[WN83]

15 minutes ago, Dave T said:

What does that actually mean? 

Who is telling people it's poop? Sky aren't, SL aren't, IMG aren't, the clubs aren't.

Well, actually, the odd owner here and there does.

He's right with Wilkin and that Salford v Leigh game. I was totally invested watching it, thought it was a quality and tense affair and was stunned when it goes to Wilkin and Tomkins post game and they just spoke about how poor Salford had been. The guys on Sky and the wider Media might not be the be all and end all when it comes to attracting more sponsors to the game but they're a starting point. I sometimes wonder if WIlkin in particular actually likes the sport or not. 

[Stainesrover]

I'm more interested in people's views on sponsorship, and why we cannot attract more sponsors than the 3 we currently have. NRL (I know is a different animal) have sponsors for instant replays for instance. Why can't we have more companies putting more money in. 

[whatmichaelsays]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

There is also the really quite simple point on the RLWC that the prices were quite simply a rip off. They were charging prices that weren't the market value for an RL event at any level. We can add a premium for a WC factor, but you really can't just take an event that you normally sell for £15-20 and stick a £70 price tag on it. It doesn't work, and it didn't work.

Value and perception is important here. I've spent a fortune on music gigs, and have just spent £220 to watch a theatre show in a few weeks for 3 of us, but I understand that's the market rate for these events. 

Dutton and his team arrogantly stuck a hefty price tag on the WC tickets after years of selling internationals at bargain prices and then appeared surprised when they played in front of empty grounds. They treated people like idiots.

So I agree, we have too small a pool in the first place, but a big issue is we don't even serve the current pool well.

We can't just fixing things by believing more, or having more faith in RL. We have to make the product better (and I don't mean shot clocks or 7 tackle sets).

I'd agree with that. The under-selling and over-discounting of RL will take a generation to overcome, and I agree that the pricing at the last WC, particularly for central seats, was excessive. 

But I also think that even if we had priced games at "normal" rates, the core issue remains - there is more supply than there is demand, and that puts too much pressure on the need to sell multiple tickets to a small pool - where other major events have the opposite issue.