Jersey / Playing kit sponsorship

[East Coast Tiger]

Yeah I can imagine your expansion areas. Gosford? Goulburn? Or is that too much of a stretch? If you want a comp that has no international competition, boy have I got the comp for you. And you get one point for failing so it should suit you down to the ground.

associationing

1pt

 

[Tyler Durden]

It's really wrong to put sponsorship on a national jersey - the national jersey is representing the nation and should be treated with the respect that it deserves without plonking sponsors logos all over it.

 

[eozsmiles]

The field would look better without the advertising logos on it too. But that's the way it is.

 

[Timmah]

Can't agree there's less multinationals or national/big businesses on jerseys/sponsoring sides. NRMA, Hisense, Jetstar, Kaspersky, Crown & The Star, NIB, Coca-Cola Amatil (NRL balls), Toyota, Steggles, St George Bank, DeLonghi... many of these companies have a national if not international profile. We're not talking backyard small business in most cases...

I don't want to turn this into another Super League hate thread - but I've always wondered how Super League, with their multi-million dollar plans for world domination, could have operated with their original "clean skin" jersey idea in Australia.

Wouldn't that have cut out a large portion of revenue for the game and the clubs? Or did they have another business model that would give us back the integrity of the jerseys? (even if they were butt-ugly designs)

To be fair, SL relented by season's end and a number of teams carried sponsorship on their jerseys. Canterbury (their own leagues club) are an example of this.

 

[Eels Dude]

Yeah I can imagine your expansion areas. Gosford? Goulburn? Or is that too much of a stretch? If you want a comp that has no international competition, boy have I got the comp for you. And you get one point for failing so it should suit you down to the ground.



1pt

You don't even make any sense yet you expect people to respect your opinions? The fact you're still going on about a typo says it all. Nobody will respect your opinions until you start respecting others'. Get over yourself.

 

[newman]

Can't agree there's less multinationals or national/big businesses on jerseys/sponsoring sides. NRMA, Hisense, Jetstar, Kaspersky, Crown & The Star, NIB, Coca-Cola Amatil (NRL balls), Toyota, Steggles, St George Bank, DeLonghi... many of these companies have a national if not international profile. We're not talking backyard small business in most cases...



To be fair, SL relented by season's end and a number of teams carried sponsorship on their jerseys. Canterbury (their own leagues club) are an example of this.

Yeah but those businesses don't carry the gravitas of Hyundai, Pepsi, LG and Reebok which we have seen in the past as front of jersey only sponsors. And this was before there was about 200 brands clogging up a jersey, so I believe this is the link being made.

In the corporate sponsorship and PR industries both NRL and AFL are not considered as having a truly national footprint and thus are relegated to second tier status when it comes to sponsorship. The big money from the big multinationals goes to cricket and racing. I could tell you how much Warnie got payed by McDonalds for his legend burger deal when they tried to take on KFCs cricket dominance, but my girlfriend would kill me. Just trust me when I say it was a lot. There is an argument that allowing too many brands on a platform like a jersey dilutes its penetration, but it hasn't been proven with any great force.

 

[firechild]

Realistically, the clubs could, if they chose, approach a large company (Toyota, Pepsi, Hyundai, etc) and offer them a sponsorship deal for a higher price that includes front of jersey sponsorship on the condition of no sponsor in the sleeve (or back of shorts or whatever) and minimum 30% coverage on sponsorship boards used for press conferences and some other extras that would usually be sold to other sponsors. However, it seems the best way to generate sponsorhip revenue is to sell smaller portions to more sponsors.

 

[newman]

Realistically, the clubs could, if they chose, approach a large company (Toyota, Pepsi, Hyundai, etc) and offer them a sponsorship deal for a higher price that includes front of jersey sponsorship on the condition of no sponsor in the sleeve (or back of shorts or whatever) and minimum 30% coverage on sponsorship boards used for press conferences and some other extras that would usually be sold to other sponsors. However, it seems the best way to generate sponsorhip revenue is to sell smaller portions to more sponsors.

And the clubs do that. They would prefer to have one large prestige sponsor rather than several smaller sponsors, its easier to administrate for one thing. However, it is increasingly hard for clubs to get these "big boys" on board for reasons I have already discussed, meaning that smaller companies, who have smaller budgets come into play.

The annoying thing for the clubs is that they are hamstrung by alot of the deals that the NRL do for the comp that have exclusivity written into it. I know for a fact that several liquor brands (beer and spirits) are desperate to get a presence in the NRL by sponsoring individual clubs, as the pouring rights at stadiums are valuable. But the NRL has done a blanket deal with Carlton and Bundaberg which locks out any other suppliers. For example, the Sharks (my club) could negotiate a front of jersey sponsorship with Tooheys or Fosters or Coopers which is linked to the supply of product for sale at Toyota Stadium. They have had several enticing offers. The NRL however forbids this as the Carlton deal is exclusive. So the Sharkies make very little themselves out of the Carlton sponsorship and have to turn away a lucrative sponsorship deal with an industry that goes hand in glove with the sport (And it means I have to drink bloody VB at the footy sending me onto the fast train to Hangover central). Thats life though.

 

[The Fruit Pickers]

Over the last 10-20yrs some major international companies that USED to sponsor teams are now nowhere to be seen (i.e Hyundai, Pepsi, Reebok). Toyota / Vodafone are the exceptions.

Watch games much?

 

[grouch]

Reebok are a sponsor of the Dragons as well

 

[Perth Red]

Wonder how much each area is worth generally?
Main front of shirt seems to be worth around $750k-1mill and short sponsors seem to go for around $100-150k based on some announced deals. Wonder how much the other areas are worth. i think things like FTA coverage, quality of the corporate environment on game day, success and brand image of the club must all play a part.

Personally I agree that I would love to see just a main front of jersey+ shorts sponsor but doubt it will change anytime soon.

 

[Timmah]

The thing about jersey sponsorship is that it covers so much more - player apparel, advertising hoardings on the ground, presser backdrops etc...

 

[Parramatta1947]

If only the clubs could have the riches of teh US sports as all of them have 'clean' outfits.

But yes, your point is spot on. It is ridiculous, I am waiting for the shoulders to be next, it just looks tacky. And the actual club logo is the smallest out of all of them...........

I hate the say it but the English Premier League is the way it should be done. Maximum exposure but the 'logos' don't distract each other either.

 

[qldseaeagle96]

Interesting, some on here want to blame the clubs - are u kidding me?!

The NRL as the governing body, as in all sports sets the paramaters for what is and isn't acceptable.

Imagine what would happen if the Manchester United tried playing with a sleeve sponsor? The Lakers turned up with say AT&T on their singlets? The governing body would go to town on them.

This has very little to do with the clubs and all to do with the governing body (in this case the NRL).

What I'm trying to get across is that the NRL could (and shoud IMHO) work to increase overall prestige of the games image and its clubs in turn. Turn the jersey space (and other associated advertising paraphernalia - ground signage, coach polo, presser signage etc...) into something more valuable. It is looking at the bigger picture / longer term benefits. Stop the hand to mouth circle.

Look at some of the short term sponsorship deals seen in the NRL in recent years, did the companies even pay up? I doubt all of them did. Firepower anyone? Quantum Eco-Solar? Herbal World, TJF-EBC? 131Shop? Can anyone remeber some of the sleeve sponsors? I recall a builder with grand plans up Eloura, Wanda way went broke on the Sharks and didn't pay.

It looks crap making kits resemble NASCARS. It's crap for the fans with sposnorships often changing throught the season. Shell out $160 and have an out of date jersey in 3-6 months at times. Who wins in the long term? Sure there is some short term gratification but that is all.

 

[supercharger]

Wonder how much each area is worth generally?
Main front of shirt seems to be worth around $750k-1mill and short sponsors seem to go for around $100-150k based on some announced deals. Wonder how much the other areas are worth. i think things like FTA coverage, quality of the corporate environment on game day, success and brand image of the club must all play a part.

Personally I agree that I would love to see just a main front of jersey+ shorts sponsor but doubt it will change anytime soon.

Dean Ritchie wrote an article last November about the Panthers search for a naming rights sponsor for the front of their jumper,if i recall correctly he claimed that the previous deal they had with Sanyo was worth $1 million a year and that they were hoping the new deal would be worth between $800,000 to $900,000 a year
while sleeve and back sponsorships would attract between $200,000 and $250,000 a year
I agree it would be nice to get to a stage where we have cleaner jerseys like the NFL and some other leagues
but atleast it's not to the same extent as Finland where teams in both the sm liiga and veikkausliiga are esentially walking billboards

 

[Eels Dude]

Interesting, some on here want to blame the clubs - are u kidding me?!

The NRL as the governing body, as in all sports sets the paramaters for what is and isn't acceptable.

Imagine what would happen if the Manchester United tried playing with a sleeve sponsor? The Lakers turned up with say AT&T on their singlets? The governing body would go to town on them.

This has very little to do with the clubs and all to do with the governing body (in this case the NRL).

What I'm trying to get across is that the NRL could (and shoud IMHO) work to increase overall prestige of the games image and its clubs in turn. Turn the jersey space (and other associated advertising paraphernalia - ground signage, coach polo, presser signage etc...) into something more valuable. It is looking at the bigger picture / longer term benefits. Stop the hand to mouth circle.

Look at some of the short term sponsorship deals seen in the NRL in recent years, did the companies even pay up? I doubt all of them did. Firepower anyone? Quantum Eco-Solar? Herbal World, TJF-EBC? 131Shop? Can anyone remeber some of the sleeve sponsors? I recall a builder with grand plans up Eloura, Wanda way went broke on the Sharks and didn't pay.

It looks crap making kits resemble NASCARS. It's crap for the fans with sposnorships often changing throught the season. Shell out $160 and have an out of date jersey in 3-6 months at times. Who wins in the long term? Sure there is some short term gratification but that is all.

So your idea is to let the NRL control sponsorship for jerseys which will no doubt result in less money for clubs. How is this a good thing?

I still wear my 2005 Eels jersey with Aasics as our sponsor. Who gives a f**k if it's outdated it's still an Eels jersey. I quite like going to games and seeing fans wearing jerseys from all different eras.

 

[qldseaeagle96]

So your idea is to let the NRL control sponsorship for jerseys which will no doubt result in less money for clubs. How is this a good thing?

I still wear my 2005 Eels jersey with Aasics as our sponsor. Who gives a f**k if it's outdated it's still an Eels jersey. I quite like going to games and seeing fans wearing jerseys from all different eras.

Eels Dude - {Bashes head against desk}:crazy:

What I am saying is the NRL should roll back what is acceptable as sponsorship space on playing kits. Thus making space more sought after and valuable - the plan would be to increase, not decrease sponsorship dollars.

Have you ever worked in advertising or marketing? If for example you wanted to place an ad in say big league, would you rather:

Be the only ad on the page ?
or
Have your ad mixed in amongst 5 or 6 others on a page?

Why do you think companies pay well for a double page spread in magazine space?

Same principal.

Not really that hard to get I would have thought!

 

[qldseaeagle96]

Reebok are a sponsor of the Dragons as well

Aren't they just kit manufacturers?

 

[qldseaeagle96]

Watch games much?

Doesn't that just highlight the point? How much more visible was Hyundai's sponsorship of the 1995 Bulldogs?

 

[Eels Dude]

Eels Dude - {Bashes head against desk}:crazy:

What I am saying is the NRL should roll back what is acceptable as sponsorship space on playing kits. Thus making space more sought after and valuable - the plan would be to increase, not decrease sponsorship dollars.

Have you ever worked in advertising or marketing? If for example you wanted to place an ad in say big league, would you rather:

Be the only ad on the page ?
or
Have your ad mixed in amongst 5 or 6 others on a page?

Why do you think companies pay well for a double page spread in magazine space?

Same principal.

Not really that hard to get I would have thought!

I see what you mean now... but if having extra sleeve sponsors etc results in a few hundred thousand dollars worth of extra revenue a year then I don't see why we should be taking that away from the clubs.

I don't think major sponsors would get enough value out of their money to be willing to pay any more than what they pay now. And clubs need the sponsorship revenue to survive so the more the better. It's already risky for clubs with having just one major sponsor because as we've seen in the past clubs struggle financially when their sponsors leave them and often it takes a lot of groundwork to find a replacement major sponsor.