Having not read the article, but having been involved in demographic targeting and profiling for many years, I can say now that whilst some organisations will hang their hat on this, many more won't.

Personally, I would question the demographic comparison with the average rah supporter. 82,000 at Twickenham for their Aviva final v 76,000 at Old Trafford for a Grand Final....I'd be stunned if there was more disposable income in Manchester. Early adopters are generally identified by smart phone usage......no doubt that the younger fans at League will push them ahead in that category.

The real kicker is a perception of the sport when it comes to the bigger sponsors. It is not only their direct sponsorship that is important, but also the association with other events......England's recent RL internationals have attracted 8,000 fans a pop and when Wales and France joined in, the grounds were empty and nobody in the media cared........compare that to the other lot and you'll get an idea of why the bigger hitters link up with the TW2 Mafia.

By the way, with 130 days to go 'til RLWC 2013 KO, every passing day the impact of coming on board as a major sponsor diminishes and so does the fee that the RFL can hope to command...as for Apple and Microsoft....

Have the RFL bothered to knock on their doors?, Bill is a well known philanthropist so sponsoring RL should be right up his avenue...

Why would Apple or Microsoft get involved in a niche sport with very little reach and even less so for the majority of the RLWC, with all but 4 games being shown on the UK version of access TV?

Major sponsors want to get involved with events that attract fans, viewers and media attention...of the 500,000 RLWC tickets available, the RFL will do well to shift 60% of them. Then there's the cost....Apple don't do cheap, so why get on board with a comp that has tickets for as little as 7.50 for group games?

Not saying that the RFL shouldn't knock on these doors, but believe me when I say that major companies that sponsor and advertising are currently booking in the adverts etc that you will see at Christmas.....the RLWC is too close for them now.

You could also ask why shouldn't they?

I think the 'why should they?' question is at the root of our problems in terms of marketing the game. We are not bold enough. We don't seem to believe in our game enough.

If Saints can attract a national brand in Typhoo (with reach abroad), why can't the RFL go one step further and attract an international brand?

Typhoo is a smaller deal than the Bradford deal in the same way heinZ big soup is a small deal from a massive company . Aiming high is great but rl is very limited in its reach

But a lot of it is about perception isn't it?

Imagine if the RFL did get a deal with Microsoft or Apple or another huge Worldwide company - It would more than likely make other larger companies take notice and maybe think about getting involved.
Just don't reveal certain facts like what the deal is actually worth - after all, thanks to the last sponsorship deal being announced as a major deal then being announced as bringing in zero revenue, we now have a perception that RL is not worth a great deal.

Found it interesting they also said that sponsors were waiting for the TV deals to be finalised. They said companies from the banking and insurance industry were interested.

As long as it isn't Wonga or similar, or the sodding meerkats

I don't think sponsoring professional sport should attract tax breaks. Amateur clubs, with charitable status, fine, but professional sport shouldn't get state benefits - effectively subsidizing player wages, club profits, etc. Not a healthy moral position.

Don't they do that for athletics which is effectively professional at the top level these days?

Why I wouldnt sponsor RL is that the sport (RL Fans, and more importantly, RL media) don't actually support the sponsors we have.

If you're a major sponsor andare looking for brand association and promotion and you hear Stobarts referred to as 'that truck lot' on a leading rugby league programme then you kind of question whether it's worth putting your money in...

The 6 Nations is never referred to as 'the 6 nations' by the RU media but as the "RBS 6 Nations". the sposnor gets value from all the secondary promotion...

if our sport (and our media) remain so negative of the sponsors we do get, we won't get others wanting to get involved...

I don't know why our refs are running round with cameras strapped to their heads like lemmings. It makes the game look cheap. If our fans are technologically minded you'd expected there would be an opportunity there for better kit, one way or the other.

You just know that if the NBA or NFL or somebody introduced ref cam that they'd manage to line up something with Google to promote their new glasses.

Compare ours refs to the refs in some female basketball comp in America that I've never heard of



They both look a little bit daft but one looks reflective of a competition that's in-line with modern technology, where as the other (the other being ours) looks like what would happen if you went in your shed and crudely taped a camera to your head