The 'Hirebase' Hull Kingston Rovers

[HKR AWAY DAYS]

This supposed leaked letter from Neil Hudgell to fellow Super League members has sparked a mass debate about the financial stability of Rugby League in Britain.

In Australia recently the 'OAK' Penrith Panthers, a team sponsored by a milk company, were asked by the NRL's sponsor Telstra, to remove a fridge because they felt it came into direct contact with their adverts, thus taking away the spotlight on them.

That was a milk company arguing with a telephone communications giant - they are hardly in competition but found themselve embroiled in a war for the spotlight on national TV.

When Penrith were sponsored by Sanyo Phil Gould publically called his side the 'Sanyo Panthers' and it worked, Sanyo paid for that! We now have the 'NRMA Insurance' Brisbane Bronos, the 'Vodaphone' NZ Warriors, North Queensland 'Toyota' Cowboys etc.

This got me thinking about sponsorship in the Super League and how Hull KR could consider that as a template to generate extra revenue.

We sold the naming rights to Craven Park to MS3, which isn't a big deal to me. So what do you think of your club looking at extra sponsorship, such as the 'Hirebase' Hull Kingston Rovers, for instance?

[phillip_whitfield]

It wouldnt do any harm, everything else is sponsored. Doesnt sound great though does it, the "Bensons for beds" Warrington Wolves!

[HKR AWAY DAYS]

(04-04-2012 05:54 PM)phillip_whitfield Wrote:  It wouldnt do any harm, everything else is sponsored. Doesnt sound great though does it, the "Bensons for beds" Warrington Wolves!

Or the Daniel Anderson Hairdressers salon Wolves.

The name is pretty irrelevant, it is all about the money.

[MossdaleRhino]

Given the problems being faced by Bradford Bulls at this moment in time, I think it proves that any kind of sponsorship that brings extra income into a club can only be a good thing. Only today I read a story about Mansfield Town FC re-naming their Field Mill ground in deference to a sponsor. The base line is it doesn't really matter what a ground is designated, if that money helps keep a club solvent and financially healthy, then Bradford's plight really hits home the point that it can only be a positive for the club.

[phillip_whitfield]

Yeah, it doesnt really detract from the sport, and with the shaky position of many clubs I dont think it can do much harm at all... probably more good!

[LeedsBarmyArmy]

Wasn't Odsal renamed a couple of years ago?

[MossdaleRhino]

(04-04-2012 06:41 PM)LeedsBarmyArmy Wrote:  Wasn't Odsal renamed a couple of years ago?

Yes actually, The Grattan Stadium I think. Not sure how that works now, with the RFL buying the place!

[MordenBronco]

Well, it wouldn't work for London! We haven't got a main sponsor!

[8ULL5HITT4]

At the moment I could consider anything ..... even the" Gary Hetherington is Ace Bradford Bulls" provided there was money in it.

[Gateaux]

(04-04-2012 06:11 PM)MossdaleRhino Wrote:  Given the problems being faced by Bradford Bulls at this moment in time, I think it proves that any kind of sponsorship that brings extra income into a club can only be a good thing. Only today I read a story about Mansfield Town FC re-naming their Field Mill ground in deference to a sponsor. The base line is it doesn't really matter what a ground is designated, if that money helps keep a club solvent and financially healthy, then Bradford's plight really hits home the point that it can only be a positive for the club.

I dont think it makes a great deal of difference to fans what the ground is called. Look at "The GPW stadium" everyone still called it Knowsley Road right up to the end BUT the club got to beneift from the money.

I bet Langtree Park will be known as Langtree Park to the fans long after the Langtree sponsorship has ended.