South African government preparing Spurs sleeve sponsorship to the tune of R1bn (£42.5m)
- Thread starter JacoZA
- Start date
curlacious
Don’t look at me. I’m irrelevant.
- Aug 29, 2017
- 2,129
- 10,105
This is the best bit:
“This can in no way be construed to [sic] a scenario of ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’.”
Which means it's definitely putting all your eggs in one basket.
“This can in no way be construed to [sic] a scenario of ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’.”
Which means it's definitely putting all your eggs in one basket.
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
Sauce is my bro, trust
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
Ja No Look In All Seriousness Hey
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
Where is that bozo that said I'm not a real fan because I don't attend match days and therefore don't financially benefit the club?
Enjoy Mama Africa Stadium you Wally.
Enjoy Mama Africa Stadium you Wally.
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
Daily Maverick understands that the proposal was due to be discussed again by the SA Tourism board, via a second — more elaborate — presentation, also in Daily Maverick’s possession, on Tuesday night.
Although Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu was slated to be at Tuesday night’s SA Tourism board meeting, Daily Maverick has established that she ended up meeting Khumalo separately, ahead of the meeting.
Sisulu, through her spokesperson Mpumzi Zuzile, initially referred Daily Maverick’s questions on the sponsorship proposal to SA Tourism, while SA Tourism had not responded to Daily Maverick’s request for comment by publication.
Another Sisulu spokesperson, Steve Motale, subsequently asked Daily Maverick to delay publication while his team “established the facts”. This article will be updated with further comments when received.
Sources close to the matter told Daily Maverick that it was on the verge of being finalised, with Sisulu allegedly eager for the deal to be sealed before the impending Cabinet reshuffle by President Cyril Ramaphosa moves her out of the Tourism portfolio, as is expected.
Read in Daily Maverick: “While tourist numbers surge, costly rolling blackouts have been a ‘game changer’ for Cape Town’s small businesses”
Sisulu did not respond to a direct question as to whether she was indeed personally championing the deal.
The presentation specifies that the total value of the sponsorship deal between SA Tourism and Tottenham Hotspur FC would be £42.5-million over three years — which converts to R910,997,814.75 in South African currency, or just under a billion rand.
As a special flourish, the deal would be announced by President Ramaphosa during his State of the Nation Address (Sona) on 10 February.
It notes that SA Tourism would be following in the footsteps of other “DMOs” — destination management organisations, which promote locations as travel destinations — in signing a sponsorship deal with a Premier League soccer team.
It lists Abu Dhabi’s sponsorship of Manchester City, Malta’s sponsorship of Manchester United and Rwanda’s sponsorship of Arsenal as similar deals — and adds a warning.
“If SA Tourism does not grab this opportunity, a competing DMO will!” it stated.
A tourism expert who spoke to Daily Maverick on condition of anonymity flatly contradicted any sense of urgency around the deal.
The expert said Tottenham Hotspur had sought sponsorship from SA Tourism as far back as 2017, but that the deal had always been rejected out of hand because the return on investment was “ludicrous”.
It states that, in the post-Covid era, with global travel opening up once more, SA Tourism needs “a series of BIG strategic and specific actions to re-assert our position”.
The first presentation does not provide details on exactly what kind of exposure South Africa would gain from the deal. A slide titled “3 business reasons why a sponsorship deal with Tottenham make [sic] sense? [sic]” lists a year-round global presence, the fact that rival DMOs are signing similar agreements, and an unspecified “high business return on investment”.
It also bears the hallmarks of having been at least partially prepared by Tottenham Hotspur rather than SA Tourism: to give one example, it refers to Spurs’ base of London as “the most connected, culturally relevant and important city in the world”, which is a surprising claim to find on another country’s tourism documents.
Among the details added by the second presentation is that “+35” British members of Parliament are “self-described Tottenham Hotspur supporters”.
This latter presentation specifies that the exposure SA Tourism will receive will include stadium branding, match-day advertising, a 5-14 day training camp in South Africa with the full first Spurs team — as well as access to free tickets and stadium hospitality.
The £42.5-million deal would run from as soon as February 2023 to June 2026, with the option to extend for another year.
The presentation claims that in exchange for this R1-billion investment, SA Tourism will receive media exposure to the value of £277-million, or almost R6-billion.
In a Q&A portion of the presentation, it makes oblique reference to the fact that SA Tourism’s expenditure in this regard would amount to more than one-third of its total annual marketing budget.
By way of reassuring antsy board members, the presentation states:
“As entering into a sponsorship partnership with Tottenham Hotspur will likely result in a disproportional contribution (of more than 36%) towards the achievement of primary objective (21 million tourist arrivals), it would therefore be completely justifiable for SA Tourism spending [sic] a disproportional percentage of its annual marketing budget (36%) on the proposed Tottenham Hotspur partnership while having in place a risk management strategy to properly manage all risks associated with that.”
It adds:
“This can in no way be construed to [sic] a scenario of ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’.”
The expert said serious questions needed to be asked about why this stale deal was now apparently being pushed through with such speed.
This is a moment of extreme instability for SA’s tourism authorities. In addition to the likelihood that Sisulu will be removed from the tourism portfolio in the coming days, adverts are currently out for a permanent SA Tourism CEO, while the body’s CFO is also serving in an acting capacity.
Whoever wins the top permanent posts now faces the possibility of coming into their jobs with a major portion of their budget effectively tied up. This is at a time when South Africa’s tourism industry is still attempting to recover from the crippling effects of a pandemic which saw the sector’s contribution to GDP fall by an estimated 50%. DM
Although Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu was slated to be at Tuesday night’s SA Tourism board meeting, Daily Maverick has established that she ended up meeting Khumalo separately, ahead of the meeting.
Sisulu, through her spokesperson Mpumzi Zuzile, initially referred Daily Maverick’s questions on the sponsorship proposal to SA Tourism, while SA Tourism had not responded to Daily Maverick’s request for comment by publication.
Another Sisulu spokesperson, Steve Motale, subsequently asked Daily Maverick to delay publication while his team “established the facts”. This article will be updated with further comments when received.
A R1bn deal to sponsor top English soccer team
What the PowerPoint presentations reveal is that the South African government, through its marketing arm SA Tourism, is seriously considering a proposal to spend close to R1-billion to sponsor one of the world’s most elite soccer teams.Sources close to the matter told Daily Maverick that it was on the verge of being finalised, with Sisulu allegedly eager for the deal to be sealed before the impending Cabinet reshuffle by President Cyril Ramaphosa moves her out of the Tourism portfolio, as is expected.
Read in Daily Maverick: “While tourist numbers surge, costly rolling blackouts have been a ‘game changer’ for Cape Town’s small businesses”
Sisulu did not respond to a direct question as to whether she was indeed personally championing the deal.
The presentation specifies that the total value of the sponsorship deal between SA Tourism and Tottenham Hotspur FC would be £42.5-million over three years — which converts to R910,997,814.75 in South African currency, or just under a billion rand.
As a special flourish, the deal would be announced by President Ramaphosa during his State of the Nation Address (Sona) on 10 February.
‘An exceptional global platform to partner with’
The first PowerPoint presentation explains that Tottenham Hotspur — the home of England captain Harry Kane, and colloquially known as Spurs — is the “8th most valuable football club brand globally”.It notes that SA Tourism would be following in the footsteps of other “DMOs” — destination management organisations, which promote locations as travel destinations — in signing a sponsorship deal with a Premier League soccer team.
It lists Abu Dhabi’s sponsorship of Manchester City, Malta’s sponsorship of Manchester United and Rwanda’s sponsorship of Arsenal as similar deals — and adds a warning.
“If SA Tourism does not grab this opportunity, a competing DMO will!” it stated.
A tourism expert who spoke to Daily Maverick on condition of anonymity flatly contradicted any sense of urgency around the deal.
The expert said Tottenham Hotspur had sought sponsorship from SA Tourism as far back as 2017, but that the deal had always been rejected out of hand because the return on investment was “ludicrous”.
In the presentation, it is claimed that Tottenham Hotspur represents “the highest-rank available global platform that meets SA Tourism’s criteria as an exceptional global platform to partner with”.
It states that, in the post-Covid era, with global travel opening up once more, SA Tourism needs “a series of BIG strategic and specific actions to re-assert our position”.
The first presentation does not provide details on exactly what kind of exposure South Africa would gain from the deal. A slide titled “3 business reasons why a sponsorship deal with Tottenham make [sic] sense? [sic]” lists a year-round global presence, the fact that rival DMOs are signing similar agreements, and an unspecified “high business return on investment”.
Second presentation defends disproportionate use of marketing budget
A second presentation, seen by the SA Tourism board on Tuesday night, is far glossier and more detailed.
It also bears the hallmarks of having been at least partially prepared by Tottenham Hotspur rather than SA Tourism: to give one example, it refers to Spurs’ base of London as “the most connected, culturally relevant and important city in the world”, which is a surprising claim to find on another country’s tourism documents.
Among the details added by the second presentation is that “+35” British members of Parliament are “self-described Tottenham Hotspur supporters”.
This latter presentation specifies that the exposure SA Tourism will receive will include stadium branding, match-day advertising, a 5-14 day training camp in South Africa with the full first Spurs team — as well as access to free tickets and stadium hospitality.
The £42.5-million deal would run from as soon as February 2023 to June 2026, with the option to extend for another year.
The presentation claims that in exchange for this R1-billion investment, SA Tourism will receive media exposure to the value of £277-million, or almost R6-billion.
In a Q&A portion of the presentation, it makes oblique reference to the fact that SA Tourism’s expenditure in this regard would amount to more than one-third of its total annual marketing budget.
By way of reassuring antsy board members, the presentation states:
“As entering into a sponsorship partnership with Tottenham Hotspur will likely result in a disproportional contribution (of more than 36%) towards the achievement of primary objective (21 million tourist arrivals), it would therefore be completely justifiable for SA Tourism spending [sic] a disproportional percentage of its annual marketing budget (36%) on the proposed Tottenham Hotspur partnership while having in place a risk management strategy to properly manage all risks associated with that.”
It adds:
“This can in no way be construed to [sic] a scenario of ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’.”
Why the speed on this questionable deal?
The tourism expert consulted by Daily Maverick said that the claims made about the marketing value of the deal were “absolute, unmitigated bullshit”.The expert said serious questions needed to be asked about why this stale deal was now apparently being pushed through with such speed.
This is a moment of extreme instability for SA’s tourism authorities. In addition to the likelihood that Sisulu will be removed from the tourism portfolio in the coming days, adverts are currently out for a permanent SA Tourism CEO, while the body’s CFO is also serving in an acting capacity.
Whoever wins the top permanent posts now faces the possibility of coming into their jobs with a major portion of their budget effectively tied up. This is at a time when South Africa’s tourism industry is still attempting to recover from the crippling effects of a pandemic which saw the sector’s contribution to GDP fall by an estimated 50%. DM
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
AMANDLAAAAAAAH
curlacious
Don’t look at me. I’m irrelevant.
- Aug 29, 2017
- 2,129
- 10,105
I don't think so, more "stadium branding"
This latter presentation specifies that the exposure SA Tourism will receive will include stadium branding, match-day advertising, a 5-14 day training camp in South Africa with the full first Spurs team — as well as access to free tickets and stadium hospitality.
Dakes
DNA of the Tottenham
- Jan 28, 2020
- 2,284
- 7,791
It'll stop short at questions. So we wanna compete with Rwanda.
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
-Afri-Coy-
Well-Known Member
- Jun 26, 2012
- 5,858
- 18,628
I fully expect a Romero a year for our money
Over to you Mr Levy
Over to you Mr Levy
Dakes
DNA of the Tottenham
- Jan 28, 2020
- 2,284
- 7,791
A challenge to get from one side of Manenberg and Lavender Hill to the other side. Should sort out any mental fragility issues in the squad.
theShiznit
Well-Known Member
- Jul 26, 2004
- 17,904
- 23,973
Surely it's only 3 years, not forever
Huddlestone22
Tom Huddlestone
- Mar 1, 2007
- 2,037
- 2,461
Yeah absolutely right. We should mock people for not agreeing with atrocities commited.
Similar threads
