Razor Wars

[Jeffles]

You may have noticed the Roos covered the Tri-Nations logo on their sleeves with black markings.

My hypothesis is this.

The PHILIPS Kangaroos are sponsored by one of the largest makers of electric razors in the world. They play in a tournament sponsored by the largets maker of manual razors. Did they sponsors pressure the Roos to avoid displaying their rival's logo, after the "embarrassment" Philips had at North Harbour? This is the only logical conclusion I can reach.

Are the Aussies undermining the torunament? Perhaps. Sponsor clashes happen all the time. This is the first time in RL I can remember a "cover up". I am appalled.

How would Gillette feel? Will they say anything? They get less value out of their sponsorship. How bad does it look on TV? The Aussies appear as though they have no respect for the tournament.

Am I overreacting? What do you guys think?

 

[YANTO]

Been mentioned on the Brits message boards and the same conclusions were drawn.
Phillips sponsor the Aussie team ,Gillette the tournament.

The tournament logo should be displayed on all team kit.
If Phillips have a problem with this surely it should have been sorted before the tournament started or even at the negotiation stages with Gillette,the Aussies Pillips and the IRLF.
After all a small logo on the shirt is a fair swop for Gillette having to be faced with "PHILLIPS" splashed all over the kangaroos shirts..

 

[Jeffles]

Well said Yanto. I agree with you.

 

[Dr Crane]

Phillips and the Kangaroos should just accept it - ie Telstra and Vodafone with the NRL.

I wonder what it feels like for the honchos at Telstra to be sitting back watching a Warriors home game and seeing Vodafone in huge letters on the goalpost pads right near where Telstra is splashed all over the field.

 

[Jeffles]

Well said Ian. The Kangaroos are treating the competition with contempt.

 

[Pierced Soul]

i was wondering what it was that they were covering....

 

[innsaneink]

Well said Ian. The Kangaroos are treating the competition with contempt.

Good on em. :thumn :thumnn

 

[JK]

It is a disgraceful move that jeopardises future sponsorship.

A certain team need an arsekicking Soprano style :evil:

 

[dimitri]

 

[Dr Crane]

Well said Ian. The Kangaroos are treating the competition with contempt.

Good on em. :thumn :thumnn

Not competition Re Kiwis and GB, competition Re Tri Series.

 

[griff]

So that's what it was. I assumed they were covering up the Tri-Nations logo but couldn't work out why (not that I gave it much thought that early in the morning).

Didn't even realise that Philips and Gillette could be seen as competitors. Gillette don't even make electric shavers and Philips don't make normal razors. Like most people I see them as being in completely different markets and I doubt anyone would have made the connection.

 

[DIEHARD]

I think they are different markets. It is incredibly immature of Phillips.

I believe it looks worse for Phillips to make the Roos cover the Tri Nations logo on their jerseys than actually just let them wear a small Gillette logo as part of the Tri Nations logo.

I believe their actions reflect badly upon the company.

 

[Jeffles]

They're in the same markets because the products are substitutable. That's the ACCC test.

 

[yakstorm]

-- Edited Article due to external factors --

 

[Stevo_G]

and the reason was?????

 

[DIEHARD]

-- Edited Article due to external factors --

:shock: :?:

 

[JK]

:?:

 

[Jeffles]

NEW SPIN.

Mascord quotes Lewis in yesterday's paper.

The Aussies didn't have to disply the logo because it wasn't in the Gillete sponsorship agreement.

So....

1) The Aussies should get new jersies that look clean.

2) Gillete and the RFL, negotiating on behalf of the RLIF dropped the ball by not making the logo mandatory. The exposure to all organisations should be self evident.

3).The Aussies are still showing the competition little respect. If there is a conflict they should just put a line through "Gilette" not the whole logo.

 

[DIEHARD]

Completely agree Jeffles. On all those three points.

Very dissapointing. It looks very bad for the Aussies and the RFL.

 

[dimitri]

They're in the same markets because the products are substitutable. That's the ACCC test.

its not quite that simple

they also look at supply substituability not just demand substitutability
like you have mentioned

then they also look at elasticity and other factors

but yeah it would seem they would be very close to being in the same market