Bulldogs' sponsorship argument set to fall on deaf ears
Glenn Jackson | April 11, 2009
THE Bulldogs will enter desperate talks to salvage a $2 million sponsorship deal armed with a plea to the NRL to be lenient in the "toughest of economic times" - but their contention that Manly had links to the same company just two years ago is unlikely to force the game's officials into a rethink.
While admitting they erred in not disclosing the deal with the Strathfield Group to the NRL before announcing it on Thursday, Bulldogs officials remain hopeful they won't have to scrap it completely and are likely to commence formal talks today in the hope of parading the sponsor's logo on the front of their jerseys for Monday night's clash with South Sydney. "We're currently in talks to determine what can be done," Greenberg said.
"We're hopeful a workable solution can be made to ensure such a significant sponsorship remains in rugby league. We hope the NRL and Telstra can see merit in these discussions. We're hopeful we can get in front of Telstra and the NRL and show them how important it is. We're not resigned to it being over. I don't know if we can resolve it in time for Monday night's game but we'll be doing everything possible to see if we can gain some support for what we can do."
On Thursday, the NRL advised the club they may have to abandon the deal with lucrative major partner, because officials believed it to be a direct competitor of the premiership sponsor, just hours after Greenberg and fullback Luke Patten announced it.
The decision came days after the NRL formally stripped the Bulldogs of two points for fielding 14 players in their round-two match against Penrith.
The NRL's director of commercial and marketing manager, Paul Kind, said he was hopeful talks could be scheduled between now and Monday, but stipulated that "in the short term, on the knowledge we have, we are rejecting the sponsorship".
He said the NRL had an "obligation to protect Telstra", which commits almost $12 million a season to the game, adding every club received a payment each season because of the exclusivity arrangement with the telecommunications giant.
"Our position remains the same - currently we consider Strathfield a competitor to Telstra," Kind said. "The Telstra deal is of such a scale that it deserves to be protected."
The Bulldogs will argue telecommunications represents less than a 15 per cent stake in Strathfield, which has undergone significant restructuring after being placed into liquidation last year.
But Kind said all information he had on the company, after only being informed of the arrangement on Thursday lunchtime, was from the company website. On it, the company lists mobile phones as one of three products and states it is a premium dealer with Telstra's major competitor, Optus.
But the NRL's bullishness provoked an angry reaction from the Strathfield Group's chairman, Vaz Hovanessian, who accused officials and the telco of being "unacceptable, uncompetitive, un-Australian, and kicking someone when they're down".
He also accused the NRL of hypocrisy because of the game's relationship with Harvey Norman and the Warriors' deal with Vodafone.
Kind said the landscape changed in 2006, when Telstra upped its financial input significantly and asked for more protection from competitors. Pre-existing deals, like Manly's, were allowed to continue, while the Warriors' arrangement with Vodafone pre-dates the NRL's Telstra links.
Manly boss Grant Mayer admitted NRL officials were "concerned" about Manly's back-of-jersey deal with Strathfield, in 2006/07, worth about $160,000 a season for the club.
Still, Hovanessian said: "I can't understand Telstra's behaviour. I'm very disappointed. We're just a small firm. Our name is Strathfield, not Vodafone or Optus, yet they're picking on us.
"This is unbelievable, and I think it will impact negatively on Telstra and the NRL. The Bulldogs have turned a corner - why kick them? Extend a hand and lift them up."
![[furrycat]](/data/avatars/m/6/6602.jpg?1213416722){kind=avatar}
