Family Club of the Year

[Dirk Gently]

Generalisations rule OK!

How about the concept that some clubs do some things (e.g. marketing) better than others, whilst some are worse. It may also be related to how much specific clubs are prepared to invest in such issues, too!

[Seal]

I didn't deny that the market is limited, but you can still maximise the opportunity. I've yet to meet a football club that have....although Arsenal have just employed a new Commercial Director (Tom Fox), who is pretty sharp.

You two in particular like to present yourself as very much ITK, and Dirk of course clearly knows far more about the intricacies of the fan - governing body relationship than I do. However when it comes to commercial operations of sports clubs, that's my day to day job so I'd like to think I can speak with a bit of authority when I say that a) they are too old school and b) they could all improve.

Of course marketing alone isn't going to save Chester, Cardiff, Crystal Palace and Pompey from financial disaster on it's own, but it is reflective of a deeper malaise and laissez-faire attitude in the way that many clubs are run.

[Sun Tzu]

it is reflective of a deeper malaise and laissez-faire attitude in the way that many clubs are run.

As opposed to all !!
Which was the bit that was challenged !!

Are you able to name a business that COULDN'T improve their marketing ? Or one that HAS maximised it's opportunity ?

Out of interest how do you feel football clubs compare to clubs in other sports (rugby, cricket, league) ?

[Seal]

Most decent size businesses these days have (relatively) sophisticated marketing machines, and I just don't see that in most football clubs. They don't treat fans as customers who deserve good service and benefits, they don't understand marketing channels, they think a digital strategy is having a website, and they expect sponsors to chuck their name on the shirt and leave it at that. Their marketing departments are generally understaffed because the key decision makers (e.g. Chairman, Chief Exec), are so obsessed with cost that they don't understand how marketing can drive revenue, and would rather keep the headcount down, even though their happy to pay the injured El Savaldorian centre forward £20k a week.

Cricket counties are even worse. Run by committee. For example an idea was pitched a few years ago to have a franchise model like the IPL for T20. It was rejected, as was the reformatted EPL, and now domestic T20 in England is a real mess. The fundamental issue is dilution of talent - you can't have a twenty team tournament and expect it to compete with the quality of the IPL.

Rugby clubs have to try much harder, as they don't have the enviable income streams of their football counterparts. You tend to find that they are more creative in their ticketing promotions, and are more prepared to work together for the greater good (e.g. moving home games to Twickenham for the first day of the season), as well as being more flexible in how they work with sponsors. Still many improvements that can be made but you see more of a can do attitude.

Rugby league has a bloomin tough sell and to be honest I'm not sure quite what they do...but they're always going to have to work hard just to stay still.

[Sun Tzu]

Thanks for that Seal - interesting observations.

I'd agree re rugby, certainly from what I know of London Irish. They do loads of work with local clubs / schools and the numbers and distances travelled by groups for games is quite incredible and way ahead of what RFC do (although LI have many more seats to fill !).

Fulham seem to do a lot, I once bought a ticket for someone else and have had phone calls from players (prerecorded of course !) , personalised emails and mail shots. They also have their 'neutral' stand and lots of different offers for games. On the down side I asked them to stop contacting me a long time ago to no effect !!

[Seal]

No worries - enjoy talking about this stuff.

Fulham are indeed a more proactive club, but again you highlight the limitations of their efforts - yes they are proactive at selling tickets, but then clearly they need to upgrade their CRM system!

[Fox Talbot]

No worries - enjoy talking about this stuff.

Fulham are indeed a more proactive club, but again you highlight the limitations of their efforts - yes they are proactive at selling tickets, but then clearly they need to upgrade their CRM system!

I don't much enjoy listening to it.

I don't want to be "monetised" by my football club. Surely if I support the club at football they should support me in other aspects of my life - not treat me as a wallt to be opened. The hypocrisy of curbing swearing whilst promoting on-line poker grates.

[Seal]

No worries - enjoy talking about this stuff.

Fulham are indeed a more proactive club, but again you highlight the limitations of their efforts - yes they are proactive at selling tickets, but then clearly they need to upgrade their CRM system!

I don't much enjoy listening to it.

I don't want to be "monetised" by my football club. Surely if I support the club at football they should support me in other aspects of my life - not treat me as a wallt to be opened. The hypocrisy of curbing swearing whilst promoting on-line poker grates.

That's the point. By watching football on TV or paying for a ticket or a replica shirt you are being monetised. You misinterpret the principle. It's not about fleecing fans, it's actually the polar opposite: treating them better so that they get an improved experience when they do spend money. That way both parties benefit - the fan is happier, and it a fan is happier they are more likely to have a good relationship with the club, which in turn will benefit them.

The inability of clubs to manage the stadium in a way that allows different types of fans to have the type of 'live experience' they want (e.g. swearing vs not swearing) is another clear example of this.

[Fox Talbot]

Well, Seal, it's not working for me. My 'opportunities to spend' are going up and my quality of experience is going down. I feel increasingly monetised and manipulated.

It's all 'respect this, buy that, don't do that, support this, wave that, silence now, clap here, don't boo there - and check your balls but don't swear if you find a lump.'

Whatever happened to football and escapism?

[Seal]

Ok. So we're in agreement then. Football clubs don't do this stuff well enough, as per my original point.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Most decent size businesses these days have (relatively) sophisticated marketing machines, and I just don't see that in most football clubs. They don't treat fans as customers who deserve good service and benefits, they don't understand marketing channels, they think a digital strategy is having a website, and they expect sponsors to chuck their name on the shirt and leave it at that. Their marketing departments are generally understaffed because the key decision makers (e.g. Chairman, Chief Exec), are so obsessed with cost that they don't understand how marketing can drive revenue, and would rather keep the headcount down, even though their happy to pay the injured El Savaldorian centre forward £20k a week.

The problem is that the bst form of marketing a football club can have is success on the pitch. If Man Utd dropped to be an average championship club, it doesn't matter how fantastic their Chinese and Arabic websites are, they aren't going to sell anything.


I mean, do you actually have any figures to back up your idea that Reading's marketing is worse than Man Utd's? Utd might well have 100 times the sales volume, but they also have at very least 100 times the number of fans.

A better website, for example, wouldn't make a massive difference. There are only so many fans out there willing to buy a shirt or scarf or any other piece of merchandise. We have perhaps 100,000 potential customers. United have 100 million. No big marketing strategy is ever going to change that. All a football club can do is try to get as much money from each fan as possible. You can't advertise for new supporters.

[Big Foot]

You can't advertise for new supporters.

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

[Dirk Gently]

You can't advertise for new supporters.

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

[Big Foot]

You can't advertise for new supporters.

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

Maybe so, but it's additional revenue streams nontheless.

[Sun Tzu]

You can't advertise for new supporters.

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

1 match ticket = £26
1 replica shirt = £40

And of course once you have filled the ground you can't take any money on the gate whereas you can keep selling replica shirts etc to an indefinite number of fans who don;t go to every game.

[Big Foot]

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

1 match ticket = £26
1 replica shirt = £40

And of course once you have filled the ground you can't take any money on the gate whereas you can keep selling replica shirts etc to an indefinite number of fans who don;t go to every game.

Less OPEX too, if you think of the costs of running the stadium and paying matchday staff. Not involved when it's a group of fans watching on the box the other side of the world in their shiny £40 shirts

[Dirk Gently]

I think you can, look at the shirts most clubs sell in the Far East when they sign a player who hails from there. Even we had an increased level of support from South Korea due to Seoul Ki-Hyeon and I'd say to a lesser extent from Ireland due to Hunts, Doyle, Long and USA from Hahnemann and Convey

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

1 match ticket = £26
1 replica shirt = £40

And of course once you have filled the ground you can't take any money on the gate whereas you can keep selling replica shirts etc to an indefinite number of fans who don;t go to every game.

How naive to believe that replica shirts sold in the Far East are the genuine, full price item. It's been estimated for instance, that for every "official" Manchester Utd shirt sold in China, over 3,500 counterfeit shirts are sold at a fraction of the cost.

Most Far Eastern marketing effort actually goes into helping the counterfeiters make money, and in boosting the sales of football on TV, boosting the PL overseas rights deal of which each PL club only gets 1/20th. But then again there are problems with pirating etc - lots of people in the Far east want to watch PL football, but very, very few want to pay full-whack for it.

[Big Foot]

But they're not money coming through the gate, which is what really counts.

1 match ticket = £26
1 replica shirt = £40

And of course once you have filled the ground you can't take any money on the gate whereas you can keep selling replica shirts etc to an indefinite number of fans who don;t go to every game.

How naive to believe that replica shirts sold in the Far East are the genuine, full price item. It's been estimated for instance, that for every "official" Manchester Utd shirt sold in China, over 3,500 counterfeit shirts are sold at a fraction of the cost.

Most Far Eastern marketing effort actually goes into helping the counterfeiters make money, and in boosting the sales of football on TV, boosting the PL overseas rights deal of which each PL club only gets 1/20th. But then again there are problems with pirating etc - lots of people in the Far east want to watch PL football, but very, very few want to pay full-whack for it.

Not knowing figures on another teams merchandising attempts in a different continent , terribly naive

[Seal]

It's not just about Shirts and Tickets...how naive to think that

Dirk is absolutely right that merchandise sales internationally are of minimal value to the clubs, as the majority of shirts are counterfeit (I worked for an IPL team in India last year so saw this first hand). However, an international fan base is a great revenue driver for two key reasons:-

1) It increases the total value of your sponsorship revenue - developing an international fan base makes the club more attractive to sponsors looking to grow their brand in emerging markets. Aon, the new sponsors of Man U, have no interest in the UK market yet are prepared to spend £25m per year to get their name on the shirt. That's because it will deliver instant awareness in their key emerging markets, namely China and the Far East in general.

2) Opens up new revenue streams, such as overseas media rights which a club can sell independently to local markets outside or in addition to any collective league agreements.

[Dirk Gently]

It's not just about Shirts and Tickets...how naive to think that

Dirk is absolutely right that merchandise sales internationally are of minimal value to the clubs, as the majority of shirts are counterfeit (I worked for an IPL team in India last year so saw this first hand). However, an international fan base is a great revenue driver for two key reasons:-

1) It increases the total value of your sponsorship revenue - developing an international fan base makes the club more attractive to sponsors looking to grow their brand in emerging markets. Aon, the new sponsors of Man U, have no interest in the UK market yet are prepared to spend £25m per year to get their name on the shirt. That's because it will deliver instant awareness in their key emerging markets, namely China and the Far East in general.

2) Opens up new revenue streams, such as overseas media rights which a club can sell independently to local markets outside or in addition to any collective league agreements.

Agree with all that, but it's all a question of what's an appropriate target for the level of club. In terms of international branding this is only really appropriate to the G14 clubs - it' part of their long-term strategy to have a local "presence" in each continent - e.g. a "Barca" and "Man Utd." etc. playing in local leagues there.

To talk of international marketing in the same way for Reading or even many of the PL clubs is ludicrous. For the likes of us, marketing is all about getting new supporters through the gate (or keeping existing ones) and not about shifting merchandise in the Far East!