2013 Jersey, Logo, Sponsorship Discussion

[Patorick]

Just found this on eBay.

Don't know about $1,500 but still it's pretty snazzy.

 

[Apey]

Souffs...changing sponsor logo for third year in a row

Sash jersey gone, new alternate

http://www.nrlstore.com.au/shop/search/1432/nrl-teams-south-sydney-rabbitohs.html

Been reading too many SWR threads, thought that said Apex at the top :lol:

 

[Henson Park Hornets]

Souffs...changing sponsor logo for third year in a row

Sash jersey gone, new alternate

http://www.nrlstore.com.au/shop/search/1432/nrl-teams-south-sydney-rabbitohs.html

As mentioned by Gazf ISC have come out with a new collar, don't mind it.

Like the new Souffs away shirt and hope they get rid of the stupid white side panelled away jersey.

 

[ek999]

Exactly. A basic rule of business is supply and demand and whatever dickhead decided on the sponsorship rules for NRL jerseys obviously missed that unit in Uni. Clubs have so much sponsorship space to sell, and potential sponsors know it, so each slot on the jersey/shorts is worth so much less.

If the NRL changed the rules to a maximum of 2 small sponsorship slots instead of the million we have now, I bet the clubs would get the same amount of total revenue and would have much better looking jerseys.

No you don't understand sponsorship. Sponsorship doesn't work the same way as what you learnt doing high school economics. Sponsorship is based on brand exposure and the potential for new business. Instead of price being based off the economic basics of supply (i.e. number of sponsorship slots available) and demand, supply is based off free to air TV time and exposure in the media. That's one of the biggest gripes clubs like Cronulla, Canberra and the Warriors have with Brisbane getting so many free to air matches. Their sponsors get a lot more advertising to a larger market then theirs do making Brisbane's sponsorship more valuable to theirs. Other factors like the club's reputation (Bulldogs 3 years ago etc.) are also a factor - if there is few companies willing to sponsor you then the price will be low

Having short sponsors, sleeve and back of jersey sponsors doesn't devalue the main sponsorship at all because they have less exposure. A larger branding makes your brand more visible to potential customers. A small branding which is harder to see on TV is less valuable and sponsors won't pay as much for it. All it does is provide the clubs with extra revenue that they would not have without those sponsors.

 

[Joker's Wild]

Little bit off topic, but I'd love the Knights to change their logo. Make it more modern.

Think it'd look even better inside a shield ...

One could argue that putting it inside a shield would make it look more retro dude

Any way, the basic premis of the Knights logo is awesome. As long as they dont go and completely re design it like Penrith, Brisbane and Cronulla have done in the past Im happy

 

[Timmah]

How is it idiotic to have a home and away differentiated by different colour side panels, collar and shorts?
It maintains the iconic souths design of red and green hoops whilst differentiating slightly for our different home and away sponsors. Not that hard to understand and not worth the criticism their jerseys receive.

Are you talking to yourself here? :?

The reason it's ridiculous is because the majority of other clubs are asked to provide a contrasting jersey as their away strip in order to be able to clearly differentiate teams. Instead, Souths get to use the same jersey with either black or white under their arms and different coloured shirts.

The "alternate" white jersey should be the away strip, and the white panel thing should go.

 

[GAZF]

Just found this on eBay.

Don't know about $1,500 but still it's pretty snazzy.

Totally worth it, whats it commemorating? Warriors first home game (thought that was vs Canberra bu that may have been rd 2).

As mentioned by Gazf ISC have come out with a new collar, don't mind it.

Like the new Souffs away shirt and hope they get rid of the stupid white side panelled away jersey.

New sleeves too, they sit differently on Webb.

Not too happy with the Souths new sponsor design, the last year's one was the best intergration into the jersey. They've gone backwards with the sponsor box, i guess the sponsors pay the money they get the representation they want.

The Star have gone from one of the best integrations to one of the worst. Why not keep the text and eliminate the black box?

The new alternate looks good with the double v.

Yes but the black rabbit gets lost in the dark colours again. Wasn't the sash around for only 1 year?

How is it idiotic to have a home and away differentiated by different colour side panels, collar and shorts?
It maintains the iconic souths design of red and green hoops whilst differentiating slightly for our different home and away sponsors. Not that hard to understand and not worth the criticism their jerseys receive.

Because they're the f**king same. Its a moot point anyway; Souths should have a plain red/green striped jersey, no sidepanels and a white rabbit, interchangeable black/white shorts and red/green socks. Why they choose to bastardise their classic design is beyond me. I'm too lazy to retread what I've said before but Souths is one of several clubs bending the rules, I wish the NRL would crack down on it.

 

[GAZF]

No you don't understand sponsorship. Sponsorship doesn't work the same way as what you learnt doing high school economics. Sponsorship is based on brand exposure and the potential for new business. Instead of price being based off the economic basics of supply (i.e. number of sponsorship slots available) and demand, supply is based off free to air TV time and exposure in the media. That's one of the biggest gripes clubs like Cronulla, Canberra and the Warriors have with Brisbane getting so many free to air matches. Their sponsors get a lot more advertising to a larger market then theirs do making Brisbane's sponsorship more valuable to theirs. Other factors like the club's reputation (Bulldogs 3 years ago etc.) are also a factor - if there is few companies willing to sponsor you then the price will be low

Having short sponsors, sleeve and back of jersey sponsors doesn't devalue the main sponsorship at all because they have less exposure. A larger branding makes your brand more visible to potential customers. A small branding which is harder to see on TV is less valuable and sponsors won't pay as much for it. All it does is provide the clubs with extra revenue that they would not have without those sponsors.

Ever since Bunniesman set up his lemonade stand he's been crapping on about business, shows in his postings.

 

[BunniesMan]

No you don't understand sponsorship. Sponsorship doesn't work the same way as what you learnt doing high school economics. Sponsorship is based on brand exposure and the potential for new business. Instead of price being based off the economic basics of supply (i.e. number of sponsorship slots available) and demand, supply is based off free to air TV time and exposure in the media. That's one of the biggest gripes clubs like Cronulla, Canberra and the Warriors have with Brisbane getting so many free to air matches. Their sponsors get a lot more advertising to a larger market then theirs do making Brisbane's sponsorship more valuable to theirs. Other factors like the club's reputation (Bulldogs 3 years ago etc.) are also a factor - if there is few companies willing to sponsor you then the price will be low

Having short sponsors, sleeve and back of jersey sponsors doesn't devalue the main sponsorship at all because they have less exposure. A larger branding makes your brand more visible to potential customers. A small branding which is harder to see on TV is less valuable and sponsors won't pay as much for it. All it does is provide the clubs with extra revenue that they would not have without those sponsors.

A classic example of using a lot of words to say little.

Explain to me then why do AFL clubs get so much more money given the relative tiny amount of sponsorship space they offer. I've seen AFL clubs announce seven figure deals for slots that are a fraction of the size of the main slot on an NRL jersey. While NRL clubs struggle to get that much combined for all of their sponsor slots.

The reason certainly isn't exposure as you claim, show me any evidence that the average AFL jersey gets seen more than the average NRL jersey.

So what is the reasoning then if it's not supply? If you had all of the Eels (just an example) various jersey/shorts sponsors bid for 2 slots I guarantee the total amount you'd get would be the same as you get now for 4/5/6 slots.

If Ferrari made ten million cars this year I guarantee they'd sell for a lot less than they are being sold for now.

You restrict supply, you increase value, you increase your income. While having much better looking jerseys.

 

[GAZF]

^ Presence in all major cities and greater FTA exposure for a start. I agree that there should be less sponsorship on jerseys but your argument is wrong.

If you had all of the Eels (just an example) various jersey/shorts sponsors bid for 2 slots I guarantee the total amount you'd get would be the same as you get now for 4/5/6 slots.

The value per sponsor MAY increase in this scenario but to suggest that it would double or triple under identical circumstances is stupid.

 

[Fire]

A classic example of using a lot of words to say little.

Explain to me then why do AFL clubs get so much more money given the relative tiny amount of sponsorship space they offer. I've seen AFL clubs announce seven figure deals for slots that are a fraction of the size of the main slot on an NRL jersey. While NRL clubs struggle to get that much combined for all of their sponsor slots.

The reason certainly isn't exposure as you claim, show me any evidence that the average AFL jersey gets seen more than the average NRL jersey.

So what is the reasoning then if it's not supply? If you had all of the Eels (just an example) various jersey/shorts sponsors bid for 2 slots I guarantee the total amount you'd get would be the same as you get now for 4/5/6 slots.

If Ferrari made ten million cars this year I guarantee they'd sell for a lot less than they are being sold for now.

You restrict supply, you increase value, you increase your income. While having much better looking jerseys.

Why the long face...

Anyways, quality meltdown merkin.

 

[Zigwaa]

Are you talking to yourself here? :?

The reason it's ridiculous is because the majority of other clubs are asked to provide a contrasting jersey as their away strip in order to be able to clearly differentiate teams. Instead, Souths get to use the same jersey with either black or white under their arms and different coloured shirts.

Souths are predominantly green with red, therefore they only clash with the Raiders and they have a alternate jersey for this. They clash with no red teams so no requirement there. Not that hard to understand.

You may have the opinion that Souths don't differentiate, I think they do and the NRL does too.

The "alternate" white jersey should be the away strip, and the white panel thing should go.

Your opinion mate, I don't agree. Why not have predmoinantly red and green hoops everyweek? It makes our team jersey recognisable each week.

Because they're the f**king same. Its a moot point anyway; Souths should have a plain red/green striped jersey, no sidepanels and a white rabbit, interchangeable black/white shorts and red/green socks. Why they choose to bastardise their classic design is beyond me. I'm too lazy to retread what I've said before but Souths is one of several clubs bending the rules, I wish the NRL would crack down on it.

It's a modern take on a classic design, not really bastardising. It will date and they will change it in time accordingly.

 

[flippikat]

Souths are predominantly green with red, therefore they only clash with the Raiders and they have a alternate jersey for this. They clash with no red teams so no requirement there. Not that hard to understand.

You may have the opinion that Souths don't differentiate, I think they do and the NRL does too.


Your opinion mate, I don't agree. Why not have predmoinantly red and green hoops everyweek? It makes our team jersey recognisable each week.

When the NRL expands, there could well be another team wearing green - this is quite possible if an Ipswich/West Brisbane bid makes the grade in the next expansion round, or if a 2nd NZ team is admitted in a future expansion.

Wouldn't it be prudent future-proofing for Souths to create a unique (mainly white) away jersey NOW?

 

[Patorick]

Totally worth it, whats it commemorating? Warriors first home game (thought that was vs Canberra bu that may have been rd 2).



New sleeves too, they sit differently on Webb.



The Star have gone from one of the best integrations to one of the worst. Why not keep the text and eliminate the black box?



Yes but the black rabbit gets lost in the dark colours again. Wasn't the sash around for only 1 year?



Because they're the f**king same. Its a moot point anyway; Souths should have a plain red/green striped jersey, no sidepanels and a white rabbit, interchangeable black/white shorts and red/green socks. Why they choose to bastardise their classic design is beyond me. I'm too lazy to retread what I've said before but Souths is one of several clubs bending the rules, I wish the NRL would crack down on it.

Yeah first home game, against Brisbane.

 

[GAZF]

It's a modern take on a classic design, not really bastardising. It will date and they will change it in time accordingly.

It is bastardising the traditional design. The sidepanels clash with the hoops and the black version is a muddled mess.

 

[dgsfan]

A presence in every major city might be the reason, however both the NRL and AFL are watched by a similar amount of people on FTA. Add the fact that the NRL wins on merchandising, and I'd definitely argue that the average NRL jersey is seen by more eyeballs than the average AFL one. Does a larger presence in WA and SA make up the large gap in sponsorship dollars? It appears so but I find it very odd.

 

[ek999]

A classic example of using a lot of words to say little.

Explain to me then why do AFL clubs get so much more money given the relative tiny amount of sponsorship space they offer. I've seen AFL clubs announce seven figure deals for slots that are a fraction of the size of the main slot on an NRL jersey. While NRL clubs struggle to get that much combined for all of their sponsor slots.

The reason certainly isn't exposure as you claim, show me any evidence that the average AFL jersey gets seen more than the average NRL jersey.

So what is the reasoning then if it's not supply? If you had all of the Eels (just an example) various jersey/shorts sponsors bid for 2 slots I guarantee the total amount you'd get would be the same as you get now for 4/5/6 slots.

If Ferrari made ten million cars this year I guarantee they'd sell for a lot less than they are being sold for now.

You restrict supply, you increase value, you increase your income. While having much better looking jerseys.

Yes, AFL clubs do generate more exposure than NRL clubs - bottom of the second last page

http://www.sponsorglobe.com/newsletter/Portals/0/Reports/SPONSORGLOBE_025_FootballCodes.pdf

 

[dgsfan]

That's actually an interesting read. Key points I took from it:

* to be virtually equal on both cumulative and average audiences
* NRL delivering 8 of the top 10 free to air broadcasts in 2011
* Average Cumulative TV Audience (team) - NRL 14,196,555 - AFL 13,366,611
* AFL teams on average deliver $3.6m in sponsorship
* The NRL are second with $3.1m (closer than I thought)

 

[applesauce]

That's actually an interesting read. Key points I took from it:

* to be virtually equal on both cumulative and average audiences
* NRL delivering 8 of the top 10 free to air broadcasts in 2011
* Average Cumulative TV Audience (team) - NRL 14,196,555 - AFL 13,366,611
* AFL teams on average deliver $3.6m in sponsorship
* The NRL are second with $3.1m (closer than I thought)

Shouldn't be when we have 4 more places to sell advertising and the primary being 5 times the size. Obviously the NRL clubs can't sell their own worth.

 

[flippikat]

New Super Rugby jerseys for 2013 for the NZ teams (with pictures!):

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/CU12...by-jerseys-get-injection-of-pride-in-2013.htm

I like the idea of the member-unions for each Super Rugby team being inscribed inside the collar, but not so sure about the embossed drawings. The designs are nice & basic though. Shame that some NRL teams can't do basic designs.