The principle of the term sponsorship if often gravely misunderstood and it presents a serious question - why don't organisations and individuals understand how sponsorship works? It may be the wrong question as many do indeed understand how it works but they try to get away by doing something which they know they can't get away with, and as we say in our local parlance, “they trying a ting”.
I have lived my professional life working with organisations and promoters seeking sponsorship and know a fair amount, I dare say, of what the deal is firstly either contractually or secondly, in a worst-case scenario, a 'gentleman's agreement'. I certainly would advise not using the second method as in the end it would be the interpretation that counts.
The promoter and/or the organisation in receipt of the sponsorship often try to get away with a little bit more than the agreement thinking the sponsor won't mind; by them bending the agreement slightly, they assume that there is no problem. Let me clear this up quickly - the sponsor does mind more times than not. Why should a sponsor put out money and allow the agreement to be altered? At the end of the day, like any consumer, the sponsor wants to get his value for money.
So two incidents regarding sponsorship have recently caught the public's attention. Firstly, the first round of the Secondary Schools Football league (SSFL) was about to kick off with a high profile game between last season's champions Naparima College vs St. Mary's College. The game was being carried live to 25 countries regionally by Sportsmax and locally by CNC3 television. Digicel and Sportsmax are in the fourth season of a five year deal with the SSFL valued at $1.5M USD. Additionally, Spanish sportswear manufacturer Joma is providing a home and away playing uniform as well as training and travelling kits for players worth over $500,000 TTD.
Now, with all this sponsorship, is it unreasonable for these sponsors to ask for their logos to be placed exclusively on their kits? I was about to do commentary on the game for Sportsmax when the unthinkable happened - Naparima College defied the SSFL instructions for uniform branding for the 2019 season. The broadcast was rightfully aborted as a total disrespect to the sponsors and the officers of the SSFL was visible on the kits being worn by the Naparima College team.
I understand there was a meeting to inform the schools of the sponsorship arrangements and all the schools, bar one (can you guess which one?) accepted the agreement. While I fully understand how difficult it is for Naparima not to give their local sponsor the kind of mileage that they may have demanded, one has to look at the bigger picture. If you are in a league, the responsibility is yours to abide by decisions taken. You certainly may not agree with them but it is a democratic body, and one has to give in or the other choice is to be excluded and move on. It is a pity the broadcast was pulled because the boys on both teams suffered; particularly St Mary's College who did absolutely nothing wrong. But Sportsmax was right to do what they did and any sponsor seeking their interest would have done exactly the same. Thankfully, both Naparima College and St Benedict's College, who incidentally did the same nonsense have apologised. Let us hope that the hierarchy at the schools understand and respect the value of sponsorship, not just from a myopic point of view, but from the overall standpoint of being part and parcel of a larger organisation.
Secondly, my good friend 'Jumbo' the nuts man. Jumbo came to prominence back in the '70s when the Oval did not have corporate boxes, but he was still able to throw a pack of nuts from the cycle track up to the top of the stands. He would place two youngsters in the stands to immediately collect the money from either the person who ordered the nuts or the person who caught the nuts. His accuracy amazed me as it did retired English cricket commentator Henry Blofeld, who gave a running commentary on Jumbo moving to throw the nuts to the top tier; after each delivery was bowled, it was back to Jumbo and his unique selling style. Jumbo had gone to social media to attack Sunshine Snacks. He even had a guy doing a pretty decent extempo song hitting out at the company. What a pity. Jumbo must understand that Sunshine Snacks would have paid a lot of money to have exclusive rights to be the nuts provider at the CPL. I am 100% certain that if Jumbo had approached Sunshine Snacks for him to get a bligh, they would have granted it because, to be frank economically, how many nuts can Jumbo sell? As an option, he can quite likely work out a deal with Sunshine to also sell their nuts and get a commission. We are ever so quick to condemn the big company, alluding to the presumption that they are trying to keep the small man down when they have spent huge sums of money to get exclusivity. It is often just a case of dialogue to work out any problems that arise such as Jumbo's. I hope Jumbo allows good sense to prevail and meets with Sunshine Snacks and let it be a win-win situation for all.
Finally, congratulations to Larry Romany on his elevation to be the President of the Cycling Federation. It is extremely refreshing to not see propaganda, politics and promises in an election for a local sporting organisation. No wonder cycling is doing so well and young Nicholas Paul is on top of the world. It just goes to show - run your organisation properly off the field and you will get your desired results on the field. Well done to the T&T cycling community!
Editor's note
The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer and do not reflect the views of any organisation of which he is a stakeholder.