A which is leading to D

E.

All of em !!

A big [sizeD[/size from me.

Because if we had both then total sponsorship would be in excess of £3.5m.
Why just settle for the £1.7m?

Why am I not surprised you jump to the defense of the indefensible

Perception.....a major sponsor will attract futher major companies...Foxy Bingo, Heinz Big soup and Brut are not even contributing 20% of the 1.7 million that Engage did....if Tetley's was worth decent wedge then the figure would have been announced when they signed up for the CC.

Hard to prove now, but when the accounts for 2012 and 2013 become available, then you'll see exactly how little the RFL generates in direct sponsorship deals....

The Foxy Bingo deal is a "hybrid" agreement.....A small retainer payment and then commission paid on every new account signed up. The Heinz and Brut deals are product placement arrangements with more money paid down than Foxy but still a mimimum payment with "cross promotional" activities (data swaps etc) therefter.

The difference is perception....if I am company A looking to launch a new product or get into sports sponsorship, I am not going to pay anything for access to the RL audience that was free in 2012 and is generating 80% less revenue than 2011 in 2013.

Hertz and Marriot are the 2 partners announced by RLWC 2013 so far.....do you think they've baid the 1,000,000 that RLWC 2000 generated in sponsorship? If you do, you need to get a check up.....

If facts are your thing it's worth noting that the £1.7m (it wasn't £1.7m) was precisely 0% of the RFL's turnover as the RFL does not receive the SL naming rights monies.

D (for a long long time) which has led to A and furthering the increase of such happening further down the line, it has also not receded nor changed the perception of the nation of B.
C isn't too far down the list but worst of all E..giving away the lead sponsorship for basically zero and even if there was any gain from it it is almost immeasurable so again basically zero..
The damage to the game with successive s in charge goes back 20 odd years, it won't ever ever recover unless some miracle happens...

Really?
I was under the impression that the RFL's turn over includes all the SL monies such as sponsorship.

If I am wrong, then I'd be keen to see where the £1.85 million came from in the report below......
rlhttps://rflmedia.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL2011Report.pdfrl

......£1.85 million in 2011 sponsorship from Coop and Gillette??????..I think not.....

Wouldn't that include the Challenge Cup & 4 Nations sponsorship as well though? Which would sound about right for the £1.85m figure without the Engage sponsorship.

If the RFL don't receive the monies, who does?

Seems odd that the RFL would be trying to negotiate deals for which they will receive no revenue? Or that whoever does receive the £ would allow the RFL to do the negotiation on their behalf!!

Does Super League (Europe) Ltd still operate?