Good grief. Consensual, legal sex leads to the Bulldogs losing two million in sponsorship. What has the world come to?
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
Good grief. Consensual, legal sex leads to the Bulldogs losing two million in sponsorship. What has the world come to?
wait, what?
@mariner4life said in NRL 2020:
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
Good grief. Consensual, legal sex leads to the Bulldogs losing two million in sponsorship. What has the world come to?
wait, what?
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
@mariner4life said in NRL 2020:
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
Good grief. Consensual, legal sex leads to the Bulldogs losing two million in sponsorship. What has the world come to?
wait, what?
i just read that. i am astounded.
that's got to be an excuse for a company pulling out of a deal due to changed economic conditions surely.
It’s a family restaurant. I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I would imagine even if the deal had been done and underway, they could choose to pull out, which would be their right.
I do think it’s silly to expect NRL players to not be idiots, but just because they didn’t do anything illegal doesn’t make them creeps, and this ridiculously stupid behavior will influence and reflect on the team’s value as a sponsorship target - I mean you won’t send their players to schools or other kid-friendly events to try to promo your restaurant chain/brands now, right?
The brand value association is far less valuable. I think this is a simple business decision.
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days. 
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
Although they had been their sponsor for quite some time now(hadn't they?) This was all about renewal??
This is already good marketing for Rashays. I didn't know they were a chain (have walked past their Darling Harbour restaurant) and thought they were Indian place. Now I know they're a chain and they're not an Indian restaurant.
This is already good marketing for Rashays. I didn't know they were a chain (have walked past their Darling Harbour restaurant) and thought they were Indian place. Now I know they're a chain and they're not an Indian restaurant.
I'd never heard of them before this. They've certainly got their money's worth.
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
This is already good marketing for Rashays. I didn't know they were a chain (have walked past their Darling Harbour restaurant) and thought they were Indian place. Now I know they're a chain and they're not an Indian restaurant.
I'd never heard of them before this. They've certainly got their money's worth.
If not for the Darling Harbour one I would be the same and to be quite frank I only noticed it because they had a pretty maitre' D.
how good. one of the blokes also plowed a teacher from another school he met on a separate visit. loves Port Maquarrie!
@mariner4life just loves giving back and is passionate about education 
sex ed that is!
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
Although they had been their sponsor for quite some time now(hadn't they?) This was all about renewal??
From the link above:
The Bulldogs were on the verge of announcing the two-year deal on Tuesday night, having agreed to terms with Rashays after long-time sponsor Kia left the club for the Brisbane Broncos this year.
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
Although they had been their sponsor for quite some time now(hadn't they?) This was all about renewal??
From the link above:
The Bulldogs were on the verge of announcing the two-year deal on Tuesday night, having agreed to terms with Rashays after long-time sponsor Kia left the club for the Brisbane Broncos this year.
Sweet
Just not main sponsor. Been with the club since 2014
Rashays had first joined the Bulldogs as a sponsor in 2014 under Raelene Castle and Ray Dib's leadership.
