I think the deal will be judged a failure by those who have already decided it will fail.

Would the money from BetFair be spent on marketing by the clubs who would have had the money from them? Of course not, it would have gone on another journeyman Aussie who will take the spot of an English player. Also, there are the negative aspects of been linked to a bookies rather than a major haulage company.

Another point, is those complaining about not seeing a "Super League lorry" on the M62 are the same who would be complaining about them only being seen on the M62 because it's like preaching to the converted.

I agree with you whats the point of us seeing them we know who they are.

I saw one comment that said just because you saw a lorry with a Rugby Union player on it you wouldn't start watching it in Hull. True but unfortunately due to the way that Rugby Union is pressed in all the media I also know the name of the competition and the names and what loads of players look like despite having no interest whatsoever in the sport. I doubt someone in Gloucester could tell you the name of our comp or who Danny Tickle was. So if it raises awareness or questions about our competition and in some way makes people ask questions maybe that is of more interest to the future of the sport than cash.

Where I work and Coca-cola next door to us in Wakey have Stobart's lorries in and out literally all the time 24 hours a day 7 days a week. These deliver from us and them all over the country.
Lots of RL fans at both firms ( ie people actually looking out for these) and no-one has seen one with the super league logo yet.

Do you honestly believe this? Because if you do you're very naive.

I think that while there is some of that going on, many people are simply questioning the value of a deal that provides zero cash and instead substitutes some advertising the value of which has yet to be demonstrated.

Bear in mind that several clubs voted against this package, including our own.

Can you just clarify for my own personal amusement which aspect of that sentence isn't quite correct...just askin'

What a ridiculous statement. Clubs have quotas and salary caps to meet regardless of who sponsors the competition.

so what would have happend with the cash then??

Do you really think it costs £250k to advertise on 100 trucks? If you do, you are very naive.

Why would the RFL take out a deal with Stobart if they could have just paid them £250k to do the same job? It's a ridiculous assumption.

I wouldn't be surprised if £250k is far off the physical cost of actually signing up 100 40ft wagons (both sides, back and top). You then need to take into account the physical cost of advertising space, which on 100 trucks for a year round I wouldn't be surprised is far off £1m a year. If you look on any website for the price advertising on the side of the motorway as a fairly comparative example, you'd get a similar figure.

AND THEN you are forgetting that Stobart haven't sponsored EVERYTHING, they are just the title sponsors, which means the new six-figure deal we've just gotten with Heinz wouldn't have been able to happen with BetFair (it was a locked-in sponsorship deal, similar to engage). The refs shirts haven't been sponsored yet, the post pads, the ball, etc. We are open to many more offers. Stobart haven't taken everything and still given us a lot in return. BetFair offered us peanuts for blanket sponsorship.

The reason some club chairmen disagreed (including our own) is because it is a risk, NOT because of it's "value".

there you go, talking sense again, it'll never catch on!

I'll keep chipping away though.

I see Irnu Bru are the official drink until 2013 now.

They have big links with Stobarts too

Usually looking around 2k a truck, depending on what you want doing