The SPFL cinch deal cost the clubs £100,000 per year in commission to middlemen - £500,000 in total

The people running the game up here are not interested in promoting Scottish football. They are interested in filling their own pockets in dodgy deals. Why aren't clubs questioning why they always seem to be paying for deals. Strange that our biggest rivals have said nothing as they are scrimping for every penny at the moment. Why haven't they spoke up?The covid dodgy vote cost clubs money due to tv deals, and now they are paying a price to get a sponsor. Our clubs are having to pay for a sponsorship deal.

A nice little gravy train for some in the game up here. And no one questions anything. No one speaks out. It's all just so wonderful isn't it. Oh, look, big bad Rangers, they are the problem.
 
Virgil Hilts said:
For 90%+ of these wańky wee clubs it will be good money, they’re living off of our coattails at our expense.
Click to expand...
Almost as much as I despise those in Scottish football who would wish us harm, I despise the attitude that demeans other clubs as being ‘wanky’ and ‘wee’. It does us no favours and comes across as arrogance of a particularly ignorant kind.
 
Corkinator said:
The fact the 2nd biggest club in the land isn’t all over this is very telling. They look to lose as much as we are in commercial revenue, it’s like they’re either not bothered or gaining from ANY deals done by the spl. Strange stance to take.
Click to expand...
They know they can’t be seen as taking our side regardless of whether we’re in the right. Sums McKay up for the spineless weasel he is.
 
oldgregg said:
Utterly pathetic. We genuinely could have done a better job ourselves, and presented offers to the SPFL for approval.
Click to expand...
We did that with the foreign tv rights for the league ( was it to India?) bought them off the league and sold on for a profit.
 
Bully tactics from the corrupt sinecure already showing ....next stop if you don't display the cinch logo you'll get threatened with a fine...guaranteed
 
Didn't they knock back Barry Hearn when he said Scottish Football was being underpaid and.He would get a bigger payouts and he would take a cut of whatever he brought in
 
mdingwall said:
The SPFL cinch deal cost the clubs £100,000 in commission to middlemen

A commercial outfit did all the heavy lifting not the SPFL commercial team and took 12.5% commission leaving the clubs £100,000 short.
Click to expand...
Where did you get this info from? Any links to an article or some such thing?
 
Sponsorship deals are often brokered by agencies, there is nothing unusual about it. Normally the agency works for one side or the other - the rights owner or the client.
As a previous director of such a agency I have been on both sides of the table - not at the same time as that would be a conflict of interest (it has happened though)
I much preferred working for the client, finding a sponsorship opportunity to match their marketing brief and constructing a strategy and then executing it once agreeing commercial terms
12.5% is a decent commission but some can be as much as 15% or if the deal is big enough the agency would cut its rate.
HOWEVER my agency would be paid by the client, not the rights holder and would work for the duration of the deal to ensure the client was getting their entitlements and also measuring the performance of the deal. On occasion both client and rights owner would incorporate my agency fee into the ‘total deal’ to make it look bigger for the PR value.
If the agency concerned works for Cinch and is paid by Cinch, then fair do’s. However they seemed to have dropped a very big clanger in not checking that the terms of the sponsorship are acceptable to the major players - or perhaps Mr Doncaster made these assurances without checking.
If this is the scenario, then as Cinch’s advisor I would be suggesting that the deal is terminated due to obligations not being met, or be looking for a substantial reduction in cost and assurances that the problems in getting the Champions to fulfill the deal are resolved at the earliest.

PS In this previous life I had the misfortune of dealing with Mr Doncaster when he was Commercial Director at Norwich City. He was full of shit then too, and suffered from delusions of competence
 
So what are the dolts at the SPFL being paid for if a 3rd party are doing their work for them?
 
possilbear2 said:
Didn't they knock back Barry Hearn when he said Scottish Football was being underpaid and.He would get a bigger payouts and he would take a cut of whatever he brought in
Click to expand...
Hearn was asked to give a talk at the SPL and said he would sack them if they worked for him.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk

Barry Hearn slams blazers running Scottish football as 'lazy' and self-pitiful

TOP sports impresario Hearn gave a withering assessment of those running the Scottish game when he spoke at yesterday's inaugural SFA convention and said those at the top are "not doing their job".
www.dailyrecord.co.uk www.dailyrecord.co.uk



 
Problem is no other Clubs stand up to them or just go with the ok then daftie attitude and then moan when they realise they are getting fkd over, it's a total shambles honestly.
 
A1bertz said:
Incredible, ain't it....
If they signed a 100 year £50m pound deal...
Wonder if that would be considered the biggest deal in the history of shifties parallel universe.

They are hopeless. Get Barry Hearn or someone of his ilk involved to sell our game. If we are gonna sell it for peanuts, Hearn would at least make sure we had KP as a fecking sponsor.
Click to expand...
Remember they got Barry Hearn to do some presentation thing. I may be wrong - but I think Doncaster spent it in the bog?

I think he pretty much said that Regan and Doncaster should be booted.

Noting ever came of his recommendations though.

www.bbc.co.uk

Hearn whirlwind hits home in Scotland

Barry Hearn's criticism of Scottish football is a breath of fresh air, says BBC Scotland's Tom English.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk



www.dailyrecord.co.uk

Barry Hearn slams blazers running Scottish football as 'lazy' and self-pitiful

TOP sports impresario Hearn gave a withering assessment of those running the Scottish game when he spoke at yesterday's inaugural SFA convention and said those at the top are "not doing their job".
www.dailyrecord.co.uk www.dailyrecord.co.uk

It was maybe just as well SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster had left the room during the speech. Had he stayed he may well have been hiding under his chair.


2020 Update...........

www.sundaypost.com

Exclusive: Barry Hearn ponders his wasted train fare and fires a warning to SPFL leadership - The Sunday Post

Barry Hearn freely admits he likes to tell jokes that leave a little bit on the listener.
www.sundaypost.com www.sundaypost.com
 
Moreloslaces said:
Where did you get this info from? Any links to an article or some such thing?
Click to expand...
www.gv6.co.uk

GV6 Sport Collective Deliver cinch SPFL Title Partnership

GV6 Sport Collective deliver an innovative 5-year SPFL Title Partner The Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL) today announces a new, multi-year partnership with cinch, the UK’s fastest-growing online used car marketplace. The innovative ecommerce business enters an agreement to become...
www.gv6.co.uk www.gv6.co.uk
 
Blutoe said:
Sponsorship deals are often brokered by agencies, there is nothing unusual about it. Normally the agency works for one side or the other - the rights owner or the client.
As a previous director of such a agency I have been on both sides of the table - not at the same time as that would be a conflict of interest (it has happened though)
I much preferred working for the client, finding a sponsorship opportunity to match their marketing brief and constructing a strategy and then executing it once agreeing commercial terms
12.5% is a decent commission but some can be as much as 15% or if the deal is big enough the agency would cut its rate.
HOWEVER my agency would be paid by the client, not the rights holder and would work for the duration of the deal to ensure the client was getting their entitlements and also measuring the performance of the deal. On occasion both client and rights owner would incorporate my agency fee into the ‘total deal’ to make it look bigger for the PR value.
If the agency concerned works for Cinch and is paid by Cinch, then fair do’s. However they seemed to have dropped a very big clanger in not checking that the terms of the sponsorship are acceptable to the major players - or perhaps Mr Doncaster made these assurances without checking.
If this is the scenario, then as Cinch’s advisor I would be suggesting that the deal is terminated due to obligations not being met, or be looking for a substantial reduction in cost and assurances that the problems in getting the Champions to fulfill the deal are resolved at the earliest.

PS In this previous life I had the misfortune of dealing with Mr Doncaster when he was Commercial Director at Norwich City. He was full of shit then too, and suffered from delusions of competence
Click to expand...
Thanks for background .

can I ask IF the 5 year deal we’re worth half a million in fees should that be discounted from the declared value so in this example what was sold as 1.6m per year be declared as 1.5m per year , would that be the professional approach ?
 
We're basically getting around £7k per game for allowing a company to advertise on our shirt and in our stadium. That is pitiful.
Any company coming direct to us for that sort of exposure would be paying a good bit more than that.
 
cloodie said:
We're basically getting around £7k per game for allowing a company to advertise on our shirt and in our stadium. That is pitiful.
Any company coming direct to us for that sort of exposure would be paying a good bit more than that.
Click to expand...
£7k per game is decent enough if your a Ross County or Livingstone but no where near good enough for us and in reality most of the rest of the top tier.
Be interesting if Aberdeen pipe up about this having previously shown signs of growing a pair?
 
Blutoe said:
Sponsorship deals are often brokered by agencies, there is nothing unusual about it. Normally the agency works for one side or the other - the rights owner or the client.
As a previous director of such a agency I have been on both sides of the table - not at the same time as that would be a conflict of interest (it has happened though)
I much preferred working for the client, finding a sponsorship opportunity to match their marketing brief and constructing a strategy and then executing it once agreeing commercial terms
12.5% is a decent commission but some can be as much as 15% or if the deal is big enough the agency would cut its rate.
HOWEVER my agency would be paid by the client, not the rights holder and would work for the duration of the deal to ensure the client was getting their entitlements and also measuring the performance of the deal. On occasion both client and rights owner would incorporate my agency fee into the ‘total deal’ to make it look bigger for the PR value.
If the agency concerned works for Cinch and is paid by Cinch, then fair do’s. However they seemed to have dropped a very big clanger in not checking that the terms of the sponsorship are acceptable to the major players - or perhaps Mr Doncaster made these assurances without checking.
If this is the scenario, then as Cinch’s advisor I would be suggesting that the deal is terminated due to obligations not being met, or be looking for a substantial reduction in cost and assurances that the problems in getting the Champions to fulfill the deal are resolved at the earliest.

PS In this previous life I had the misfortune of dealing with Mr Doncaster when he was Commercial Director at Norwich City. He was full of shit then too, and suffered from delusions of competence
Click to expand...
Very interesting read and its the kind of information that J. Bisgrove will have been feeding into our board, if they were not always aware.
 
TNT said:
Remember they got Barry Hearn to do some presentation thing. I may be wrong - but I think Doncaster spent it in the bog?

I think he pretty much said that Regan and Doncaster should be booted.

Noting ever came of his recommendations though.

www.bbc.co.uk

Hearn whirlwind hits home in Scotland

Barry Hearn's criticism of Scottish football is a breath of fresh air, says BBC Scotland's Tom English.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk



www.dailyrecord.co.uk

Barry Hearn slams blazers running Scottish football as 'lazy' and self-pitiful

TOP sports impresario Hearn gave a withering assessment of those running the Scottish game when he spoke at yesterday's inaugural SFA convention and said those at the top are "not doing their job".
www.dailyrecord.co.uk www.dailyrecord.co.uk

It was maybe just as well SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster had left the room during the speech. Had he stayed he may well have been hiding under his chair.


2020 Update...........

www.sundaypost.com

Exclusive: Barry Hearn ponders his wasted train fare and fires a warning to SPFL leadership - The Sunday Post

Barry Hearn freely admits he likes to tell jokes that leave a little bit on the listener.
www.sundaypost.com www.sundaypost.com
Click to expand...
Nothing has progressed in our game beyond us getting back to the top which should have provided donkey and the rest with some meaningful opportunities if only they were not usless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNT
Mr. T. said:
Almost as much as I despise those in Scottish football who would wish us harm, I despise the attitude that demeans other clubs as being ‘wanky’ and ‘wee’. It does us no favours and comes across as arrogance of a particularly ignorant kind.
Click to expand...

Good for you.

The club bs concerned are smaller than Rangers and in the main their fans / directors are wanks, and they live off of our coattails.
 
ChildOfGod said:
Thanks for background .

can I ask IF the 5 year deal we’re worth half a million in fees should that be discounted from the declared value so in this example what was sold as 1.6m per year be declared as 1.5m per year , would that be the professional approach ?
Click to expand...
Technically it should, and the fee to the rights holder (net of commissions) is the figure which should be quoted, but all parties prefer to beef it up for PR reasons
 
Rab The Bear said:
£100,000 for each year of the contract, £500,000 is a substantial wedge.
Click to expand...
Put it another way. There are 12 teams in the SPFL. 12.5% is the value of the contract for one and a half teams (if divid equally) for the entire 5 years, given over in commission for a bog standard deal. Then McLennan whoops and blows smoke up his chums erse. It’s fekkin scandalous.
 
Square it! said:
Very interesting read and its the kind of information that J. Bisgrove will have been feeding into our board, if they were not always aware.
Click to expand...

I suspect that on this occasion the SPFL have used an agency to find a sponsor. This is also common practice. The agency will have created a sales pitch and given them a list of potential clients they would approach (giving them exclusivity) or agreed a time frame in which they had sole selling rights.
I would have expected that Doncaster and his team would have had to let the members know this was happening via the board and would have shared commercial information with the board. Any final deal should have then been signed off before it was committed to contract.
These deals which involve multiple members with their own sponsorship deals are a nightmare as there is bound to be a conflict with one or more members.
For example I negotiated a sponsorship deal for Scottish Hydro which included Aberdeen, Dundee, Dundee Utd and St Johnstone.
In the end it was different for each club as some had already agreed elements of the deal with other sponsors. On this occasion Aberdeen had a long standing shirt sponsor which meant altering that part of the deal, and adding other elements to make up some of the shortfall in benefits. It also meant less cash for them.
The Cinch deal could have been done the same way dividing the money pro rata in terms of value/delivery
Seems lazy on behalf of the SPFL and/or the selling party
 
Virgil Hilts said:
Good for you.

The club bs concerned are smaller than Rangers and in the main their fans / directors are wanks, and they live off of our coattails.
Click to expand...
I’ll continue with my view that they are all opponents there to be beaten which you do by running faster, playing more skilfully, working harder and showing respect.
I’m sure you’ll continue with yours and we can agree to differ.
 
Mr. T. said:
I’ll continue with my view that they are all opponents there to be beaten which you do by running faster, playing more skilfully, working harder and showing respect.
I’m sure you’ll continue with yours and we can agree to differ.
Click to expand...
Showing respect has feck all to do with beating anyone. When you are the champions you have EARNED the right to be arrogant.
 
Crispy Bacon said:
Showing respect has feck all to do with beating anyone. When you are the champions you have EARNED the right to be arrogant.
Click to expand...
Strange that, because the manager always talks about showing respect to our opponents but, then, what does he know?
 
Hurricane Run said:
Yeah but, "huge credit for asking an agency to find a sponsor, because our £400k a year CEO couldnt", just didnt have the same ring to it
Click to expand...
I read somewhere before that the SPFL "team" were working really hard and long because they were forced to furlough staff, not Doncaster mind you.
 
Govan36 said:
I read somewhere before that the SPFL "team" were working really hard and long because they were forced to furlough staff, not Doncaster mind you.
Click to expand...

I dont doubt Covid presents some challenges, that arent to be underestimated. It wasnt to blame for us running our Premier League sponsorless, twice in the last 10 years. Neither has it been responsible for a farce of a TV deal.

I was a tad tongue in cheek mate, but compare our commercial department to the SPFLs and i can understand why SR was irate at the SPFLs performance on the commercial front.

Apologies if i missed the point you were making though mate.
 
Hurricane Run said:
I dont doubt Covid presents some challenges, that arent to be underestimated. It wasnt to blame for us running our Premier League sponsorless, twice in the last 10 years. Neither has it been responsible for a farce of a TV deal.

I was a tad tongue in cheek mate, but compare our commercial department to the SPFLs and i can understand why SR was irate at the SPFLs performance on the commercial front.

Apologies if i missed the point you were making though mate.
Click to expand...

I would be very surprised if our whole commercial/marketing department are on much more than the 400k Doncaster is receiving for being a completely useless prat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top