Strategy CEO Thread - Jennifer Watt - Started Jan 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

Yeah ok, I guess I don’t think past Mazda too much.

It’s only here I’ve noticed that people are so aware of sponsors, especially apparel. For whatever reason I’ve never really cared other than wanting us to make money.
Beyond the major sponsors: Mazda, Sprit of Tasmania and PUMA the other sponsors are largely forgettable.

I reckon I could recall Dulux, Tasmanian Heritage and Ponting Wines but that would be about it.
Screenshot 2024-11-11 at 12.52.34 PM.png
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Beyond the major sponsors: Mazda, Sprit of Tasmania and PUMA the other sponsors are largely forgettable.

I reckon I could recall Dulux, Tasmanian Heritage and Ponting Wines but that would be about it.
View attachment 2162662
Let me help you remember one more:

Water Boy GIF
 
No, I’m interested in seeing how people justify anything positive that has occurred over the last five years when matched against the shitshow that is our on field results/membership rubbish/willingness to sell games to a different state (we’re now up to our fifth state/territory)/list management/off field hiring (Paul Roos. What a win.).

My contention is that anything positive pales into insignificance when compared with the negatives.

Which is exactly why we are where we are.
Honestly, dude, your negativity towards anything to do with the club appears to be bordering on a morbid disorder, so I don't think it's healthy to feed into that.
 
Honestly, dude, your negativity towards anything to do with the club appears to be bordering on a morbid disorder, so I don't think it's healthy to feed into that.
Well, the constant positive slant in the face of our current position is equally fascinating, bordering on delusional.
 
Sure it would be good to have the revenue from a shorts sponsor. But it's idiotic to take an offer way below value. Aren't you the one telling us that household budgeting is exactly the same as business or government budgeting? Would you sell your house for well under value just because that was the only offer?
Still polishing that turd brother. :stern look
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Too retaliate: Watters is doing a great job with the sellign games and new training shirts. And I am yet too here what anyone would do if they where CEO.

Were you CEO or Chairman? All seems pretty radical to me.
 
Like anything, you set your value and if you don't have a buyer at your price, you can either choose to buckle and accept unders, or you hold out until you get your price. The issue is, once you accept unders, you're not going to get your price the next year.
Yeah ok. Let’s see what we get next year then. Would want to be decent given this year was zero. Wd are not exactly the Eagles or Collingwood that we can get to picky with sponsorship dollars.
 
Yeah ok. Let’s see what we get next year then. Would want to be decent given this year was zero. Wd are not exactly the Eagles or Collingwood that we can get to picky with sponsorship dollars.
For sure, I get that.

And look, I'm certainly no sponsorship expert, but I have been watching Formula 1 since the cars were pulled by horses, and I've seen plenty of seasons where teams refused to carry a title sponsorship and feature branding on sidepods. If sponsors don't offer enough cash, then they don't get the major real estate. They might get a wing or end plate, but they don't get the feature slot.

That's where we were at with our shorts sponsor in 2024. We could have given the spot to any one of these minor sponsors of the club:

Love the game, not the odds
McDonalds
Tasmanian Heritage
Comwire IT
Dulux
Robert Half
Southern Global Facilities Management
Ponting Wines
Bulk Nutrients
Department of Education
The Pass
Drink Wise
Melbourne Airport Parking
Old Woolstore
Cool Ridge
Gatorade
Pepsi Max

...but none of them pays enough to warrant the valuable spot on our match kit. Then again, I suppose it might have made a couple of people around here a little less anxious to see a colorful badge from one of these companies on our shorts even if it didn't involve any extra money.
 
Sure it would be good to have the revenue from a shorts sponsor. But it's idiotic to take an offer way below value. Aren't you the one telling us that household budgeting is exactly the same as business or government budgeting? Would you sell your house for well under value just because that was the only offer?

No, comparing dynamic revenue like sponsorship to a one off sale like selling a house is idiotic..

The short sponsorship isn’t sold, it’s effectively rented year on year. You raise the value as demand grows.

Empty revenue streams, reduced growth and cashflow is bad business. Period.
 
No, comparing dynamic revenue like sponsorship to a one off sale like selling a house is idiotic..

The short sponsorship isn’t sold, it’s effectively rented year on year. You raise the value as demand grows.

Empty revenue streams, reduced growth and cashflow is bad business. Period.
So you would let Melbourne Airport Parking have a logo on the shorts just to fill the spot even though they only pay enough to warrant getting a mention on the website and having offers emailed to members via the club? No. They get what they pay for and if they don't pay enough to earn themselves real estate on our game day strip, then you don't give that away.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Strategy CEO Thread - Jennifer Watt - Started Jan 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top