Boycott these spineless corporates

Sharkie77

Mako Shark
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
PKF is about $200k a year and LG is about $800k.

Some of the sponsors have made very rash and disappointing decisions on an incident that happended 7-years ago. I can appreciate the concern that some sponsors may have had if it was a recent incident....again 7-years ago.
 

gando2230

Jaws
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
10,882
Reaction score
63
Location
Cronulla
who is Wendy Wu Tours? If they are not going to support us for some thing that happened in 2002 stuff them.
 

fancyman

Bull Shark
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
20
Location
tha shire
Tyrepower - need new tyres soon, tyrepower are one of the more convenient ones but bad luck im going elsewhere

Wendy Wu Tours - nfi

Westfield Miranda - obviously dont go there

Australia Mushroom Growers Association - dont like mushrooms to begin with

due to kevin 07s GFC, they are just looking for an excuss to pull out,
 

Google News

Newsbot
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
79,588
Reaction score
34
Scandal hits Sharks in pocket

Scandal hits Sharks in pocketSydney Morning Herald, AustraliaTHE decision by the NRL to force the Cronulla Sutherland rugby league club to open its books to league accountants comes after four companies pulled their sponsorship - worth about $150000 a year - following the Four Corners report on the 2002 ...

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqnews/scandal-hits-sharks-in-pocket/2009/05/17/1242498639200.html

Scandal hits Sharks in pocket
Jacquelin Magnay
May 18, 2009

THE decision by the NRL to force the Cronulla Sutherland rugby league club to open its books to league accountants comes after four companies pulled their sponsorship - worth about $150,000 a year - following the Four Corners report on the 2002 Christchurch sex scandal.

Two of those companies - Westfield Miranda and Wendy Wu Tours - are directly linked to the female market, and there is growing concern among remaining sponsors about the way the club relates to its female fan base. "We are keen to talk to the club this week because for us it is a business decision, and it is not good business to be associated with a club that has such negative headlines in respect to women," one sponsor's client manager told the Herald.

"It's never come up before but on Friday, one of our senior executives - she's a woman - asked me pretty bluntly, 'How many women are on the board of the Sharks?' I don't think they have one, do they?

"But that's the pressure from the top [of our company] down, and we're suddenly justifying why we are a sponsor. I thought we could ride it out but as every day goes on, it seems to get worse."

Insiders said other sponsors were worried about the ongoing financial crisis, and might use the excuse that they no longer wanted to be associated with a club that had turned a blind eye to a group sex culture to exercise a get-out clause in sponsorship contracts.

With the club reeling from the group sex revelations aired in the Code of Silence program - and top club officials Barry Pierce and Tony Zappia refusing to name the players involved- there is significant concern from sponsors about the club's reputation.

But the parlous financial state of the club itself has others worried as well. NRL CEO David Gallop has stepped in personally, preparing to meet key long-term sponsor LG Electronics to help the club ease any fears. LG has been with the club for nine years and contributes about $1 million a year for jersey sponsorship, stadium signage, matchday sponsorships, official team merchandise and a corporate box.

Chief executive Zappia is in the tough position of trying to resuscitate the club's plummeting reputation while trying to stem the bleeding of cash resulting from poor home gate receipts and a struggling licensed club. Zappia had budgeted for crowds of 13,000 but, so far this year, the average is just under 9000.

The NRL hierarchy wants to know the Sharks' full financial picture from its own accountants before making any decision about ongoing assistance. Earlier this month, the NRL rejected a plea from the club to stage five games in Gosford next year in return for guaranteed income. The club's annual statement from last year showed it had short-term debt of more than $11m, an overdraft of more than $2m, that it operated at a loss of $1.4m in 2008 and had a tax debt of $800,000.

"We will have a team of people from finance, marketing and membership going to Cronulla in the next day or so to put their financials under a microscope," Gallop said. "We want to get a clearer picture where they are at.

"I am sure they will fully co-operate, and I really don't expect our guys to discover any big surprises, because we have been monitoring the Sharks' financial position for some time."
 

Great White Shark

Hammerhead
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Messages
302
Reaction score
4
sorry all. On this one I disagree with you...
The sharks, like these sponsors, are running a business. As a business owner myself I know how difficult it is to built value in goodwill. We can not expect, given what has happened, that these business continue to blindly sponsor us. Sponsors are very hard to come by and frankly we have breached our contracts with them. It has nothing to do with spine. These sponsors made a business decision to sponsor us and they are making a business decision to remove their sponsorship. Pure and simple.
We need to run our business better and by Greg Pierce's own admission, the sharks did not adequately deal with what happened in 2002. I hasten to say that had we done more this would not have happened today.
We as fans need to show support through tough times, not our sponsors. And quite frankly, as a business, the sharks' board has not really ensured the stability of the club. If we should boycott anyone it should be the BOARD!!!
 

Megashark

Jaws
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
5,826
Reaction score
63
Location
Auckland NZ
I agree with you rising, Does anyone know how much lg and pkf pay us a year?

LG contributes about $1 million a year, according to this story in todays SMH. Like others on here I also support LG when it comes to buying product; they have been a great sponsor - the longest running in the comp I believe - and we can ill afford to lose them. We should be thankful to David Gallop for agreeing to step in and speak with them on the club's behalf.

Scandal hits Sharks in pocket
Jacquelin Magnay | May 18, 2009

THE decision by the NRL to force the Cronulla Sutherland rugby league club to open its books to league accountants comes after four companies pulled their sponsorship - worth about $150,000 a year - following the Four Corners report on the 2002 Christchurch sex scandal.

Two of those companies - Westfield Miranda and Wendy Wu Tours - are directly linked to the female market, and there is growing concern among remaining sponsors about the way the club relates to its female fan base. "We are keen to talk to the club this week because for us it is a business decision, and it is not good business to be associated with a club that has such negative headlines in respect to women," one sponsor's client manager told the Herald.

"It's never come up before but on Friday, one of our senior executives - she's a woman - asked me pretty bluntly, 'How many women are on the board of the Sharks?' I don't think they have one, do they?

"But that's the pressure from the top [of our company] down, and we're suddenly justifying why we are a sponsor. I thought we could ride it out but as every day goes on, it seems to get worse."

Insiders said other sponsors were worried about the ongoing financial crisis, and might use the excuse that they no longer wanted to be associated with a club that had turned a blind eye to a group sex culture to exercise a get-out clause in sponsorship contracts.

With the club reeling from the group sex revelations aired in the Code of Silence program - and top club officials Barry Pierce and Tony Zappia refusing to name the players involved- there is significant concern from sponsors about the club's reputation.

But the parlous financial state of the club itself has others worried as well. NRL CEO David Gallop has stepped in personally, preparing to meet key long-term sponsor LG Electronics to help the club ease any fears. LG has been with the club for nine years and contributes about $1 million a year for jersey sponsorship, stadium signage, matchday sponsorships, official team merchandise and a corporate box.

Chief executive Zappia is in the tough position of trying to resuscitate the club's plummeting reputation while trying to stem the bleeding of cash resulting from poor home gate receipts and a struggling licensed club. Zappia had budgeted for crowds of 13,000 but, so far this year, the average is just under 9000.

The NRL hierarchy wants to know the Sharks' full financial picture from its own accountants before making any decision about ongoing assistance. Earlier this month, the NRL rejected a plea from the club to stage five games in Gosford next year in return for guaranteed income. The club's annual statement from last year showed it had short-term debt of more than $11m, an overdraft of more than $2m, that it operated at a loss of $1.4m in 2008 and had a tax debt of $800,000.

"We will have a team of people from finance, marketing and membership going to Cronulla in the next day or so to put their financials under a microscope," Gallop said. "We want to get a clearer picture where they are at.

"I am sure they will fully co-operate, and I really don't expect our guys to discover any big surprises, because we have been monitoring the Sharks' financial position for some time."

Source
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,356
Reaction score
6,183
Location
IN A BAR
clare
its perfect because she knows the difficulty women face and she is used to being the only woman, surrounded by men
 

dragons

On Probation
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
383
Reaction score
0
they publicly pulled out . but behind the doors they will still sponsor harks . think about it
 

Gymea Shark

Mullet
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
U got me wrong

So whose interests do you represent, because you clearly have a motive here.

Whenever corporate sponsors are involved in any sport, there has traditionally been an easy out because of perceived "brand damage".

I am saying that in this case that is absolute nonsense -- no one seriously connects these brands with a tarnished reputation due to events back in 2002. Their decision to pull support is a cop out, pure and simple and I won't cop it.

They only sponsor sporting clubs to build brand loyalty. What they don't realise is that it is a two-way street and their knee-jerk over-reactions can also backfire on them. I decide where I spend my money and they don't deserve a cent of it.

Harvey Norman is not pulling its backing of the sport - simply because it is not short-sighted.

U have got me wrong, I dont have any motive with this.
I am currently a sponsor . and have no desire to pull my sponsorship for any reason other than that i have grown up within woolooware and have supported the sharks since i could walk. I dont get anywhere near the exposure that i should for my sponsorship dollar ,but i dont care. I decided to provide sponsorship purely to show that my business supports the team that i love. However at the moment i can see how others are not willing to do the same.Since all this has blown out of proportion in the media, not once have the Directors or Management Informed any Sponsor of the problems or what is being done. The CLUB is also in the RED financially and the first anybody knows about it is in the paper.Additionally the Board has decided witout any consultation with YOU and I .( Its YOU and I who own the club as with all the thousands of members.), that it is in everybodys best interest to moove 5 games per year to Gosford. That is together with one game allready contracted to Adelaide for the next 5 years. SO WHAT LOYALTY IS THERE TO US FANS.????
It offends me that these decisions have been made without our say.
NOW YOU MUST AGREE WITH ME ON THAT SUBJECT.
So now you might understand that those sponsors might also be a bit upset that their corperate dollar is loosing its value very rapidly.A $50,000 dollar deal isnt what it seems when its decided by the club to send almost half the games away. Added to this is the MEDIA'S ATTACK ON PLAYERS and Sex Scandals. I have no motive other than to Support the sharks , but you may now understand that unfortunately the CLUB is not doing anything to give value to those who support them. The CLUB'S DIRECTORS ARE THE ONE'S THAT SHOULD BE ON TRIAL HERE.They are the reason that the dollars are going elsewhere. IF YOU AND I HAD MONEY INVESTED LIKE THOSE CORPERATE SPONSORS DO WE WOULD BE LOOKING ELSEWHERE ALSO.
 
Last edited:

RisingUp

Hammerhead
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
328
Reaction score
3
U have got me wrong, I dont have any motive with this. I am currently a sponsor . and have no desire to pull my sponsorship

Firstly, good on you for sticking with the Sharks.

I understand that sponsors can do what they choose with their dollars and it's hard to argue that this scandal is making it difficult for companies to hold their nerve.

I think my point has been lost in translation though. I am saying that this is not like any other incident in recent years (ie. the Bulldogs scandal) which prompts sponsors to back out because they fear being tarnished by association. If it was a current issue involving current players, I'd understand.

I would like to know what evidence there is that their brands are being tarnished, because I truly don't believe there is any evidence of that. It's a common marketing excuse, but it's not always valid.

Pulling out because they are fed up, is another matter. And if that's the case they should say so.
 

BackRowMadness

Tiger Shark
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
2
but in reality, they ended their deals with us because they were more worried about everyone else boycotting them for being in partnership with us, not sharks fans abandoning them for leaving us
There is an element of truth there but most people wouldnt know who sponsors what team except the major sponsor.
 

slide rule

Jaws
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
20,480
Reaction score
464
Location
General Admission
So, they want the general community to see that they don’t condone this degradation of women and blah blah blah, so they immediately pull the sponsorship.

But then they reconfirm the allegiance to the Sharks once it has all blown over. Now Sharks fans can view them as a loyal supporter of our club.

No-one else will be following their actions in relation to this matter anymore, so it is all sweet in the wider community.

Win/Win for them I guess.

And as long as we get the cash I don’t care! :cheers
 

gosharks

Tiger Shark
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
1,256
Reaction score
0
i read in daily telegraph website that

westfield is again sponsoring sharks with 20 000 per year maybe calls to boycott them had a effect
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,356
Reaction score
6,183
Location
IN A BAR
ill forgive them for coming back with 20k instead of 15k. obviously still wont shop there anytime soon though
 
Top