Patersons in oval talks over name-game

[The InnFORCEr]

Ben Harvey, Sean Smith and Mark Duffield,
The West Australian
October 21, 2013, 5:14 am


Patersons has started talks with the WA Football Commission to rollover naming rights at Subiaco Oval, with its landmark 2010 deal expiring next year.

Speculation is mounting that the local broker, which is struggling to post a profit, will not be able to afford to continue the high-profile sponsorship.

In 2010 Patersons agreed to pay the WA Football Commission about $700,000 a year for four years for the naming rights.

The new contract will likely cover the 2015, 2016 and 2017 AFL seasons. It may be the last time a company enjoys branding at WA's principal sporting venue because Premier Colin Barnett has ruled out selling the rights to the new Burswood stadium, scheduled to host AFL games from 2018.

The 2010 deal was considered cheap at the time but marketing expert Barry Urquhart said he did not think Patersons got value for money because the broker needed brand building.

"Patersons has fostered a parochial, proudly West Australian message but most people around Australia would not know Patersons and therefore their recall . . . would be low," Mr Urquhart said.

"The rule of thumb is you need to spend five times as much as the original sponsorship to get value out of the initial outlay.

"You need to be able to leverage that outlay."

Mr Urquhart said Patersons has struggled to do that but a retail-focused company such as Wesfarmers would be able to leverage sponsorship through initiatives such as its loyalty cards.

Perth internet company iiNet and finance company Homeloans Ltd were both keen in 2010. They have continued their association with the AFL, with iiNet sponsoring Hawthorn and Homeloans boasting Fremantle captain Matthew Pavlich as an ambassador.

Homeloans is no longer considering the deal. iiNet did not respond to _WestBusiness. _

Emirates, which recently freed up $1 million a year after junking its sponsorship of the Western Force, was nominated by sources as being a possible contender.

A spokesman for the WA Football Commission confirmed negotiations with Patersons for a new deal were under way.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-...ver-name-game/

[shasta]

Hmmmm. Does anyone else not even know who or what Pattersons are? I have never really got interested in AFL after 35yrs in the west. Perhaps that's why I have never had any interest in Pattersons either. NIB OTOH, backed up naming rights to Perth Oval with TV ads. So the unbelievers know who they are.

PS. How's the arrogance of Barney Rubble? Ruling in/out stuff 5 or more years into the future.

[The InnFORCEr]

They are stock brokers!

[jargan83]

PS. How's the arrogance of Barney Rubble? Ruling in/out stuff 5 or more years into the future.

Fairly consistent with his constant refusal to sell the naming rights to Perth Arena

[The InnFORCEr]

Since being voted in he has already cancelled the Ellenbrook train and Row Highway extension. What's next???

[Alison]

Fairly consistent with his constant refusal to sell the naming rights to Perth Arena

I believe he has some sort of obsession with "Perth" being in the name of every publicly-funded building in Perth. It seems to matter not a jot that the taxpayer is picking up the cost of that decision by virtue of the lost opportunity for money to be raised from selling the naming rights.

Even the new children's hospital has been given the exceedingly boring name of "Perth Children's Hospital" (not that I am suggesting that the naming rights for a hospital should be sold off!!)

[PeterM]

What ever name it is known by to me it will always be a rubbish stadium for watching the game they play in heaven

[jargan83]

Even the new children's hospital has been given the exceedingly boring name of "Perth Children's Hospital" (not that I am suggesting that the naming rights for a hospital should be sold off!!)

At least it's not being named after some pointless monarch

[jono]

I believe he has some sort of obsession with "Perth" being in the name of every publicly-funded building in Perth. It seems to matter not a jot that the taxpayer is picking up the cost of that decision by virtue of the lost opportunity for money to be raised from selling the naming rights.

Even the new children's hospital has been given the exceedingly boring name of "Perth Children's Hospital" (not that I am suggesting that the naming rights for a hospital should be sold off!!)

It could be worse - there is a bell in the bell tower called the Richard court.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Happy]

so Elizabeth Quay named after royalty is bad and not naming the childrens hospital something alongs the lines that PMH is is bad as well ... you guys need lives

[Alison]

So do you for bothering to comment.

[Darren]

Not getting sponsorship, and calling "Perth Arena" by its name rather than something like "Crazy Johns Arena" will cost me what - $1 or $2 in tax per year? (assuming the govt hits us up for the money it misses from not selling off naming rights). I'll happily cop that ...

[shasta]

They are stock brokers!

And the likelihood of AFL supporters knowing that is?

As an aside I have a vague recollection of Soul-Pattinson pharmacies in Sydney once being called R.Soul-Pattinson. Wonder why they changed that.

[Alison]

Not getting sponsorship, and calling "Perth Arena" by its name rather than something like "Crazy Johns Arena" will cost me what - $1 or $2 in tax per year? (assuming the govt hits us up for the money it misses from not selling off naming rights). I'll happily cop that ...

I'd rather they took the money from Crazy John to run the Arena and used mine for other public services like water or more affordable housing. But it's neither here nor there really in the grand scheme of things I guess.

[todd4]

TIF - you may have gone arty but things are going to get a little confusing around here!