Tweet
Is this the best deal, ISSA?
published: Thursday | June 7, 2007
EVEN AFTER ISSA announced the realisation of its $24 million budget for the Manning and daCosta cups - largely due to Pepsi's sponsorship - I still have to question the wisdom and the rationale of the organisation's choice not to go with WIsynco.
For the uninitiated regarding this issue, WIsynco, through its Coca-Cola sponsorship offer, it is understood, would have much more far-reaching significance than that at present on the table from Pepsi. Now, I have no preference for either company but I am of the opinion that it would make good financial sense to go with the company offering more.
I have learnt, for instance, that WIsynco's input could have amounted to about $50 million a year!
My investigation has led me to believe the WIsynco deal was $30.3 million per year for three years.
In additional to this, I also learnt that WIsynco was also committing $2 million in prizes, $5 million in promotion for both rural and urban competitions, and $1.5 million to help with gear. Again, these figures are separate from the $30.3 million which ISSA could spend whichever way it wanted.
WIsynco, distributor of beverages, plastic utensils and grocery products, among things, I learnt, was also offering a programme where schools who spent with them would receive, at the end of the year, a 10 per cent refund.
Partnership
An ISSA release, sent out on May 30, announced that Digicel had joined Pepsi Cola Jamaica Ltd. as title sponsors, while saying they were also pleased to have KFC and Scotiabank as associate sponsors.
"The negotiations were difficult and extensive. However, we are now satisfied with the following:
1. Our budget of $24 million will be adequately provided for.
2. Schools will now receive a sum, which will assist with their budget in preparing teams for the competition.
3. Other benefits to schools will include payment of all referees' fees, subsidy to travelling, match and practice balls, provision of gear and all associated costs.
ISSA's president Clement Radcliffe, while saying they are satisfied, added: "When we look at the other offer, which we never accepted, we are saying that the combination of title and associate sponsors, they were not significantly different ... if they were different at all."
As for the offers outside of the $30.3 million offer from WIsynco, Radcliffe said yesterday he was not too sure about the other offers such as prizes and promotion, but noted no field development was included.
Radcliffe also said the present sponsors would announce other offers outside of the sponsorship at a later date.
He also said ISSA was only dealing with direct sponsorship.
But my question to Radcliffe is, and will remain, how much is Pepsi's deal worth?
Wrong signals
Also, how can Radcliffe say WIsynco's deal was not better when the company was offering to spend so much outside of the proposed $30.3 million?
In my opinion, ISSA did not want WIsynco to be the sponsors of the Manning and daCosta Cups, especially after they gave several deadlines to them.
WIsynco, I was told, wrote to ISSA from as early as January expressing interest in taking over both competitions. ISSA in turn, I understand, replied and at the same time wrote to Pepsi informing it of the situation, while pointing to a May 4 deadline, after which it would make its decision.
WIsynco, I understand, sent in its proposal on May 1 and up to the deadline date (May 4), Pepsi had not replied.
In trying to find out where it stood, WIsynco followed up on the process seeking answers from ISSA, who kept putting them off by pushing back the date, which leads me to ask another question.
Was the pushing back of the date to allow Pepsi time back into action? Only Radcliffe can tell.
Like the Digicel vs Cable & Wireless fight for sponsorship of West Indies cricket, I believe both deals should have been put on the table for transparency so that the public can judge.
President Radcliffe owes the schools, the media and Jamaicans an explanation. The Pepsi deal cannot, I repeat, cannot, be the best for schoolboy football. I will continue to say this until proven wrong.
published: Thursday | June 7, 2007
EVEN AFTER ISSA announced the realisation of its $24 million budget for the Manning and daCosta cups - largely due to Pepsi's sponsorship - I still have to question the wisdom and the rationale of the organisation's choice not to go with WIsynco.
For the uninitiated regarding this issue, WIsynco, through its Coca-Cola sponsorship offer, it is understood, would have much more far-reaching significance than that at present on the table from Pepsi. Now, I have no preference for either company but I am of the opinion that it would make good financial sense to go with the company offering more.
I have learnt, for instance, that WIsynco's input could have amounted to about $50 million a year!
My investigation has led me to believe the WIsynco deal was $30.3 million per year for three years.
In additional to this, I also learnt that WIsynco was also committing $2 million in prizes, $5 million in promotion for both rural and urban competitions, and $1.5 million to help with gear. Again, these figures are separate from the $30.3 million which ISSA could spend whichever way it wanted.
WIsynco, distributor of beverages, plastic utensils and grocery products, among things, I learnt, was also offering a programme where schools who spent with them would receive, at the end of the year, a 10 per cent refund.
Partnership
An ISSA release, sent out on May 30, announced that Digicel had joined Pepsi Cola Jamaica Ltd. as title sponsors, while saying they were also pleased to have KFC and Scotiabank as associate sponsors.
"The negotiations were difficult and extensive. However, we are now satisfied with the following:
1. Our budget of $24 million will be adequately provided for.
2. Schools will now receive a sum, which will assist with their budget in preparing teams for the competition.
3. Other benefits to schools will include payment of all referees' fees, subsidy to travelling, match and practice balls, provision of gear and all associated costs.
ISSA's president Clement Radcliffe, while saying they are satisfied, added: "When we look at the other offer, which we never accepted, we are saying that the combination of title and associate sponsors, they were not significantly different ... if they were different at all."
As for the offers outside of the $30.3 million offer from WIsynco, Radcliffe said yesterday he was not too sure about the other offers such as prizes and promotion, but noted no field development was included.
Radcliffe also said the present sponsors would announce other offers outside of the sponsorship at a later date.
He also said ISSA was only dealing with direct sponsorship.
But my question to Radcliffe is, and will remain, how much is Pepsi's deal worth?
Wrong signals
Also, how can Radcliffe say WIsynco's deal was not better when the company was offering to spend so much outside of the proposed $30.3 million?
In my opinion, ISSA did not want WIsynco to be the sponsors of the Manning and daCosta Cups, especially after they gave several deadlines to them.
WIsynco, I was told, wrote to ISSA from as early as January expressing interest in taking over both competitions. ISSA in turn, I understand, replied and at the same time wrote to Pepsi informing it of the situation, while pointing to a May 4 deadline, after which it would make its decision.
WIsynco, I understand, sent in its proposal on May 1 and up to the deadline date (May 4), Pepsi had not replied.
In trying to find out where it stood, WIsynco followed up on the process seeking answers from ISSA, who kept putting them off by pushing back the date, which leads me to ask another question.
Was the pushing back of the date to allow Pepsi time back into action? Only Radcliffe can tell.
Like the Digicel vs Cable & Wireless fight for sponsorship of West Indies cricket, I believe both deals should have been put on the table for transparency so that the public can judge.
President Radcliffe owes the schools, the media and Jamaicans an explanation. The Pepsi deal cannot, I repeat, cannot, be the best for schoolboy football. I will continue to say this until proven wrong.