2012 Jersey & Sponsorship Discussion

[Lockyer4President!]

^^^
One sleeve has the equivalent of the NRL logo on there. Look for the stylised 'S'.

Its clearly not as cut and dry as you think mate, otherwise it would already be done

Obviously there were a lot of reason why that was the case.

Now with the club grant almost certain to exceed the salary cap and with the ARL prepared to hand out grants to clubs which need it, the need for cash at any cost will hopefully lesson.
It's time for the ARL to come out with the tighter regulations for clubs getting jersey sponsors.

 

[cleary89]

I'd much rather money go towards grass roots then have 2 less sponsors on the shorts

 

[100%green]

The Brisbane Lions have one front sponsor the size of a club emblem, a rear lower back sponsor and a small shorts sponsor.

The Queensland Reds have one front of jersey sponsor and one top-back sponsor. The sleeve sponsor is only on one sleeve.

This is the way the game should be heading.

But please, tell me how the NRL, which will 10 times richer than S15 and on equal footing with the AFL needs all of these extra sponsors...

Both comps have their jersey sponsorships set up their way.

Super Rugby also have collar sponsors as well.

If the NRL teams are getting good amounts to put sponsors where they are what is the problem??? Would you want your club to take less to look how you want them to? Sponsors are hard to come by and to make up what you'd loose from back or sleeve ones may make the majors ditch the teams they have.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

this

how many clubs are actually making a profit each year? I don't know how much sponsorship is worth to AFL clubs or yawnion, but i imagine with AFL their phenomenal football club memberships help significantly with revenue streams

i don't think it's a case of clubs underselling sponsorships - you only get what people are interested in paying. and if clubs were that flush with money they didnt need more sponsors then they wouldnt be putting sponsors everywhere

i'd personally rather see less sponsors and more integrated sponsorship but it obviously isnt possible ath this stage

Why is it obviously not possible?

Both comps have their jersey sponsorships set up their way.

Super Rugby also have collar sponsors as well.

If the NRL teams are getting good amounts to put sponsors where they are what is the problem??? Would you want your club to take less to look how you want them to? Sponsors are hard to come by and to make up what you'd loose from back or sleeve ones may make the majors ditch the teams they have.

The point is that if you only have one or two jersey sponsors then the companies will be more likely to pay a premium as they have exclusivity, which would make up for most, if not all, of the shortfall in having fewer sponsors on the jersey.

 

[cleary89]

The point is that if you only have one or two jersey sponsors then the companies will be more likely to pay a premium as they have exclusivity, which would make up for most, if not all, of the shortfall in having fewer sponsors on the jersey.

Wow, how are you not a CEO of an NRL club? Maybe you should inform them of your wonderful idea.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Wow, how are you not a CEO of an NRL club? Maybe you should inform them of your wonderful idea.

Quality response again.

 

[100%green]

Why is it obviously not possible?


The point is that if you only have one or two jersey sponsors then the companies will be more likely to pay a premium as they have exclusivity, which would make up for most, if not all, of the shortfall in having fewer sponsors on the jersey.

Ummm no that is not how it would work at all.

Look how long the Raiders, Sharks, Knights, Dragons and Storm just to name a few had to wait for their sponsors this year. I worked in the merchandise industry and the amount that had no sponsors was ridiculous.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

I guarantee roosters are getting more money with Isuzu, Opel and ACFS than they were with only steggles on the front.

 

[cleary89]

Quality response again.

You were already proven wrong in regard to the reds sponsors. Do you really think that clubs would actively search for and try to recruit sponsors if it wouldn't make them any more money and would fill their jersey with more sponsors?

 

[Timmah]

Ummm no that is not how it would work at all.

Look how long the Raiders, Sharks, Knights, Dragons and Storm just to name a few had to wait for their sponsors this year. I worked in the merchandise industry and the amount that had no sponsors was ridiculous.

Knights, Dragons and Storm all had ongoing sponsorship with companies that have been there for more than a year, in Dragons' case almost ten years...

 

[Joker's Wild]

I dont think he was referring to the main sponsor exclusively

The Knights lost C&A from last season Timmah and had to go with Hunter Ports, a company majority owned by Tinks

 

[Lockyer4President!]

You were already proven wrong in regard to the reds sponsors. Do you really think that clubs would actively search for and try to recruit sponsors if it wouldn't make them any more money and would fill their jersey with more sponsors?

Clubs are simply trying to maximise what they can earn. Clubs can have front of jersey, back of jersey (top & bottom), both sleeves, and front & back of shorts sponsors.

Some clubs like Souths and Newie already have sponsors high up on the sleeves and below the collar.

All I'm saying is that now the clubs know that their future is secure, they'll get getting a few million extra dollars every year from 2013 onwards and on top of that they have the central funding from the ARL if they need it.

 

[100%green]

Knights, Dragons and Storm all had ongoing sponsorship with companies that have been there for more than a year, in Dragons' case almost ten years...

I meant the other sponsors, be it front or back.

 

[GAZF]

Dropping sponsors immediately is unrealistic but its something to aim for. The long term aim should be reduced sponsorship, with clubs supplementing losses with alternate income streams. This of course requires better runs clubs league-wide which, with the ARLC implementing a benchmark for grants, will be a reality in a few years time. Also, with the increasing value of league sponsorship, clubs will get more money for the same advertising space.

 

[hrundi99]

The value in major sponsorship in league is largely determined by the exposure gained via tv, online and press exposure which is assessed by independent media marketing companies.

For example, is the major logo seen in the paper? How big is the photo? What page is it on? etc... All of these parameters are assessed at a certain value and over the course of the year totalled up to assess the overall value of the sponsorship.

As you can imagine, clubs that are going well and appearing on the back page of the paper regularly (for the right reason) add more value to their sponsorship properties.

While the clubs have an opportunity to increase their revenue with properties that the NRL allows to them, they should take them.

 

[Stinkler]

Watch the sponsors line up for the Sharkies now!!!!!!
Financial powerhouse!!!!!!

 

[The Voice of Reason!]

Dropping sponsors immediately is unrealistic but its something to aim for. The long term aim should be reduced sponsorship, with clubs supplementing losses with alternate income streams. This of course requires better runs clubs league-wide which, with the ARLC implementing a benchmark for grants, will be a reality in a few years time. Also, with the increasing value of league sponsorship, clubs will get more money for the same advertising space.

I don't think we will ever be rid of sponsors. If the English Premier League has sponsored shirts, and they are truly awash with cash, there is little chance that we will be cleanskins at some point in the future.

However, that isn't to say that there isn't merit in reducing the number of sponsors. Simple supply and demand dictates that there is value in scarcity: if we can create greater demand for jersey sponsorship, instead of becoming cyclists we can leverage greater value out of the few sponsorship "windows" we allow.

My preference (pie in the sky) if we are to have sponsorships is to have a single, "blended in" sponsor on the front. Not "WOW! Sight and Sound" monstrosities. No double back sponsors. Etc, etc.

 

[GAZF]

I don't think we will ever be rid of sponsors. If the English Premier League has sponsored shirts, and they are truly awash with cash, there is little chance that we will be cleanskins at some point in the future.

However, that isn't to say that there isn't merit in reducing the number of sponsors. Simple supply and demand dictates that there is value in scarcity: if we can create greater demand for jersey sponsorship, instead of becoming cyclists we can leverage greater value out of the few sponsorship "windows" we allow.

My preference (pie in the sky) if we are to have sponsorships is to have a single, "blended in" sponsor on the front. Not "WOW! Sight and Sound" monstrosities. No double back sponsors. Etc, etc.

I never said the NRL would be free of sponsors. I agree with the rest of your post but I think that even a single sponsor is not likely. I'd be happy with two (one on the front, another on the back below the number, name above the number.

 

[Cumberland Throw]

Roosters have the worst line up of sponsors in the NRL

Oh wait the sharks is worse

Shark red bull
Hisense
Fishermans Friends

That is embarrassing

We really are second tier for sponsors at the moment...

I hate the f**kin swans, but to have

Citi
VW
QBE

as your three main sponsors who pay about 8 Million a year for the privellidge is pretty good...

 

[M2D2]

Roosters have the worst line up of sponsors in the NRL

Oh wait the sharks is worse

Shark red bull
Hisense
Fishermans Friends

That is embarrassing

We really are second tier for sponsors at the moment...

I hate the f**kin swans, but to have

Citi
VW
QBE

as your three main sponsors who pay about 8 Million a year for the privellidge is pretty good...

:lol::lol::lol: What bullshit is this? Did you get a uni degree in judging sponsorships or were you home schooled?