Opinion Paul Licuria AMA video

[Trickster]

This discussion is in the context of sponsorship, and if you consider typical companies that sponsor footy clubs: insurance companies, car companies, financial services companies, supermarkets …

… there’s nothing that ties them specifically to football. Those companies just want to get their brand in front of as many eyeballs as possible. They happen to choose football, however they could just as easily pay to plaster their brand on a different billboard.

An example of characters are Blair Joscelyne (Moog) and Marty Mulholland. They are two knockabout lads in Sydney who have day jobs (non-car related), but they have a hobby where they run a YouTube channel where they fix up second hand cars. They have three and a half million subscribers, they typically get around half a million views an episode, but there are episodes where they’ve had around 11 million views. They’ve had over 800,000,000 views across their two channels over the 12 years they’ve been running. It’s estimated they generate around $500,000 a year in advertising revenue from YouTube (not bad for a hobby, huh?). Obviously YouTube get their cut, but the point is that they provide a much cheaper way of putting company brand names in front of eyeballs, compared to what something like an AFL coverage does.

If you’ve an advertiser, do you spend big dollars on an AFL half time ad break? Or do you spend more modest dollars on YouTube? YouTube (and other social media) also offer the advantage of having targeted advertising by age group, gender, location demographic, etc.

Here’s one of their old iconic episodes with Moog and Marty below (8.4 million views) …




To swing back around to your question about who is big specifically in footy? AFL is probably a bit of a ‘pay to play’ environment, the broadcasters pay big dollars, so it’s probably not so easy to get access. At the other end of the scale you have ‘LJ’, an 11 year old kid from Adelaide who has interviewed everybody from Gold Coast President Tony Cochrane to Warwick Capper to Rory Sloane. He’s got interviews up with three of our lads pre draft (McCrae, Ginnivan and Poulter) but one of the most charming ones is this one below with our AFLW player Sharni Leighton (Norder) . Check it out, who do you reckon gets the best out of their interviewee, this kid ‘LJ’, or Robbo? This vid has only got 130 views, but the kid clearly loves what he does and he gets the best out of his interviewees. He’s made over 250 videos so far and I reckon if he keeps it up he’ll be a household name one day.

Thanks for your detailed response and for sending these through - I will sit down and watch both thoroughly as I appreciate you going to the effort to send them across. And no I wasn't aware of either of them but its safe to say without even watching the 11yo kid, I'd rate his interviewing skills better than Robbo.

It's an interesting discussion overall. I'm not sure whether mediums like youtube are eating into potential sponsorship opportunities at the moment or whether it opens up another revenue stream. I suspect in future companies within the industries you mention may divert some of their advertising dollars away from sports and club sponsorships and TV advertising to mediums like youtube and specific shows / channels within. When that happens I guess is the question. Not to say that clubs shouldn't plan or be on the front foot for this nor should they use these types of mediums themselves as per the Licuria interview to communicate with supporters.

And no doubt as the younger generation who have grown up on ipads and smart phones have different viewing habits to people like myself, that will shift the advertising landscape going forwards. I mean in 10-20 years people will be staggered that newspapers / magazines were physically produced, as they'd just be all online you'd think.

What I like though is that it does provide people who may not have had an opportunity to express themselves or be heard a voice. And that's a good thing. My reluctance with some of these social media / tech companies is when they pick and choose who can say what and Google left me suitably unimpressed when they were having their tax battle with the Aust gov't that they can manipulate what the audience sees when they enter a search. As a result, I have stopped using them. But anyway that's just me. It will be interesting to see how this plays out down the track. Going back to your concerns on naming rights at our training venue, whether Holden have specifically stopped because of Eddie comments, change in media landscape, wanting to reduce their advertising spend etc, I'm not quite sure.

Either way, I still have more immediate concerns on what happens with our finances over the next few years. It would have been challenging nonetheless with covid, but I believe our off-field sagas have done us no favors. Probably one of the worst times to have board / coaching instability.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Going back to your concerns on naming rights at our training venue, whether Holden have specifically stopped because of Eddie comments, change in media landscape, wanting to reduce their advertising spend etc, I'm not quite sure.

Holden as a brand is defunct, it no longer exists.

It’d be like having our training base named “The Ansett Centre” or “The State Bank Victoria Centre”.

The deal expired at the end of 2020 (link below) and 7 months on they still don’t have a naming rights sponsor.

Collingwood to seek new naming rights sponsor for home base

One of sport's biggest commercial sponsorship deals could be a casualty of Holden's exit from Australia.

www.theage.com.au

I'm not sure whether mediums like youtube are eating into potential sponsorship opportunities at the moment or whether it opens up another revenue stream. I suspect in future companies within the industries you mention may divert some of their advertising dollars away from sports and club sponsorships and TV advertising to mediums like youtube and specific shows / channels within. When that happens I guess is the question.

It’s already happening, and has been for years.

 

[MyManLynch]

Our only naming rights saviour will be a Chinese Automobile manufacturer.
Which do you prefer…
The Dongfeng Motor Corporation Centre
The Shanghai Automotive Centre
The Great Wall Motors Centre

 

[76woodenspooners]

Our only naming rights saviour will be a Chinese Automobile manufacturer.
Which do you prefer…
The Dongfeng Motor Corporation Centre
The Shanghai Automotive Centre
The Great Wall Motors Centre

Nio - they’re a decent automotive design house.

 

[Roverjg]

Did it happen though?

I am trying to find a later article that I read wherein Eddie and Gary Pert acknowledged part of our Financial strength was in part due to 3 large donations by Alex Waislitz

 

[76woodenspooners]

I am trying to find a later article that I read wherein Eddie and Gary Pert acknowledged part of our Financial strength was in part due to 3 large donations by Alex Waislitz

Given the number of benefactors we’ve had over the years …

… whether it be Waitslitz, Wren, or that anonymous benefactor in the (circa 90’s?) who left (circa $3 million?) to the club when he died …

… or the probably kazillions of others who we don’t know about, it beggars belief that we’ve had such financial ups and downs.

 

[Roverjg]

Given the number of benefactors we’ve had over the years …

… whether it be Waitslitz, Wren, or that anonymous benefactor in the (circa 90’s?) who left (circa $3 million?) to the club when he died …

… or the probably kazillions of others who we don’t know about, it beggars belief that we’ve had such financial ups and downs.

GOOD BUSINESS, THE COLLINGWOOD WAY

The mid-1980s were a low point for the Collingwood Football Club. After finishing third in 1984, the team missed the finals for the next three years. The "New Magpies" administration, who came to power in 1983 in a blaze of publicity with former David Syme & Co managing director Ranald Macdonald...

www.afr.com

Thank Goodness for the Collingwood Brand

 

[76woodenspooners]

GOOD BUSINESS, THE COLLINGWOOD WAY

The mid-1980s were a low point for the Collingwood Football Club. After finishing third in 1984, the team missed the finals for the next three years. The "New Magpies" administration, who came to power in 1983 in a blaze of publicity with former David Syme & Co managing director Ranald Macdonald...

www.afr.com

Thank Goodness for the Collingwood Brand

Paywall

 

[Roverjg]

Paywall

An article from the Australian Financial Review dated 29 September 1989 - but still rings true in many ways

The mid-1980s were a low point for the Collingwood Football Club. After finishing third in 1984, the team missed the finals for the next three years. The "New Magpies" administration, who came to power in 1983 in a blaze of publicity with former David Syme & Co managing director Ranald Macdonald as president, had failed to achieve its aim - a Victorian Football League premiership.

But the administration not only failed to get results on the field; Australia's most famous football club was also facing bankruptcy. It was only generous donations by members after a financial call for help that kept the gates open at the club's Victoria Park headquarters.

The Collingwood dilemma, all the more traumatic because of what its tradition means to the league, highlights the problems facing sporting bodies today. The days are long gone when football clubs, based on suburban loyalties, could survive on gate sales and the Saturday night chook raffle.

In the professional era, corporate sponsors and television are increasingly exerting pressure on the clubs, as they seek to maximise their investments. In 1988 Collingwood's turnover was $5,329,000, sponsorship and marketing contributing more than $1 million. This year's turnover is expected to be $6 million.

The sponsorship money, plus the receipts from a club membership of more than 13,000, has pulled Collingwood out of the red it found itself in after the New Magpies chased a premiership with an open cheque book. In 1988 membership subscriptions and sales of reserved seats at Victoria Park netted the club $728,000.

This augers well, not only for the club. A financially healthy Collingwood, even if it is not winning premierships, is crucial to the league. In 1988 Collingwood's games attracted 33% of all match attendance, or nearly one million spectators. This year, following the resurgence of Geelong and Essendon, this fell to 25%, but still represents a phenomenal drawcard for the game.

Collingwood on a winning streak generates publicity, sells newspapers and, most importantly, ensures that a great army of black and white supporters passes through the turnstiles every Saturday. No other VFL club can match this.

Collingwood's success has been based on leadership, pride, and discipline. Put another way, the club was always bigger than the individual, reflecting a tribal loyalty that was suburb-based. And although the supporter base in the suburb of Collingwood is losing its importance (85% of supporters now live in the sprawling eastern suburbs of Melbourne), it remains important to the club. This year it conducted a door-to-door survey in the suburb to determine if people wanted Collingwood to remain at Victoria Park - the majority did.

There is a message here that goes beyond Collingwood. The league should take notice, because it demonstrates that it is possible to combine a traditional club with the modern-day demands of administering a $6-million business. The league wants the club to move to Waverley, the league's headquarters in Melbourne's south-east, but Collingwood wants to stay at Collingwood, despite the league's enticing financial arguments.

In a letter to Collingwood, the league says Waverley would boost club revenue through more superboxes, bigger crowds, increased membership drawn from the eastern suburbs, and better dining facilities. But the club, from outspoken president Allan McAlister down, is not impressed.

The club committee has responded with proposals to improve Victoria Park, including a nearby carpark to be built by private developers and set aside for spectators on Saturdays, upgrading the ground to cater for 35,000, and giving the people of Collingwood some access to the social club.

The club has political support from the Collingwood Council and Premier John Cain. The politicians obviously know where the votes live, even if the league commission does not. But the politics of the issue do not stop there. The office of president of a football club is political, and McAlister would almost certainly lose the next election if the administration agreed to move to Waverley.

Put another way, a move would split the club. McAlister says it had an operating profit of $510,000 in 1988, and a move to Waverley could jeopardise that financial success. Treasurer Peter White, an accountant with Ernst &Young, is just as cautious about any supposed windfall at Waverley.

"The league's figures are very much based on Collingwood having on-field success," White says. "But in the lean years, when only your diehard club members come through the gates every Saturday, Waverley could be a negative."

There is another aspect to this. Although corporate sponsors are important, they are obviously attracted by both on-field success and spectator appeal. While Collingwood has not won the flag for 31 years, it has been in the finals for 21 of the 31, including nine (heart-breaking) grand finals. It is this level of success that ensures Collingwood's corporate support.

A successful Collingwood is vital to the competition. It would seem that a league attempting to establish a national competition has little to gain and much to lose by tampering with a club that appears to have at least found a formula for combining a strong balance sheet with tradition, if not premierships.

 

[76woodenspooners]

An article from the Australian Financial Review dated 29 September 1989 - but still rings true in many ways

…

Interesting article

Amazing to think we went from $5 million turnover to $75 million turnover …

… and 13,000 members to 80,000 members, in the space of 30 years.

Also curious that they were looking to expand Vic Park to have 35,000 capacity, like that would have been close to enough!

 

[Trickster]

Holden as a brand is defunct, it no longer exists.

It’d be like having our training base named “The Ansett Centre” or “The State Bank Victoria Centre”.

Didn't realise (nor obviously care) that they totally exited Australia - get the analogy though. thanks

Let's see what 2022 brings us. Clearly dishing up performances like the last qtr today won't help.