Kwesi Mugisa, Staff Reporter

Pryce

Despite appreciating the concept of sports as a business, Andrew Price, communications and promotions manager of last season's abandoned Premier League title sponsors, Wray and Nephew, admits that from their perspective, perhaps a little loyalty wouldn't have hurt.

After picking up the mantle as title sponsors from cigarette brand, Craven A, in 2002, the rum distillers renewed a five-year contract with the Jamaica Football Federation (JFF) in 2006. Although their was one year left on the current contract, both parties were said to be pleased with the benefits being gained from the arrangement and opted for an early signing.

However, with the new contract expected to run until 2012, the newly formed Premier League Clubs Association (PLCA) were last year given the right to manage their own affairs. High on their list of priorities, the organisation sought to secure increased funding, and with Wray and Nephew unable to match those demands, ties between both entities were said to be cordially cut.

"We did not want to block another individual from coming forward to assist the sport," Price explained.

Contractual arrangement

"We had a contractual arrangement with the JFF, so we could have blocked the approval of a new sponsor. However, it was a beneficial decision where all parties were concerned. We did not want to stop anybody from coming in to assist the sport at a greater level than we can; that would have been silly."

Price added: "At the same time, we here at Wray and Nephew believe some amount of loyalty could have been shown to us in all of this discussion. But that's how sports is. It's a business and people have to make decisions and we had to make ours, so we made way for Cash Plus as title sponsors."

However, in light of recent developments with the now embattled financial entity, it seems the grass really wasn't greener on the other side. With the season coming to a close, the PLCA was forced to snap ties with Cash Plus with only $24 million collected from the $50 million per year three-year contract.

A terrible situation

While not quick to decry the Cash Plus idea as a terrible one, Price pointed to the fact that he believes there is a general misguided principle where it relates to title sponsorship and perhaps it was time for a new approach.

"One thing the public needs to understand is that the title sponsors for a league cannot absorb the cost for the overall administrative running of the league and at the same time subsidise each club with money to run their programme," Price explained.

"There is no where in the world that this actually happens. In the future what we have to look at is a title sponsor for the league, and then try and get corporate entities to support each club," he added.

However, while the above mentioned approach is one common in leagues across the world, issues have arisen with it locally in multiple sports. Title sponsors are often unwilling to share emblem space on merchandise and some even oppose other symbols being prominently displayed in the same area as their own.

Ainsley Walters, Freelance Writer

Edward Seaga, former prime minister and chairman of the PLCA.

SOON AFTER entering a three-year $150 million sponsorship deal with Cash Plus Limited (CPL), a company whose flagship product was an alternative investment scheme, offering minimum returns of 120 per cent per annum, storm clouds gathered on the horizon for the Premier League clubs Association (PLCA) when the firm was hit with a 'cease and desist order' by the Financial Services Commission in December.

The PLCA, which had signed on to the deal with great fanfare, parting ways with previous sponsor Wray and Nephew Limited, was plunged into uncertainty when Cash Plus started experiencing cash flow difficulties, which was blamed on commercial banks' refusals to honour its cheques. A receiver last week declared the company bankrupt and its chairman, Carlos Hill, along with his brother, Bertram, as well as Peter Wilson, believed to be the firm's chief accounting officer, were arrested and charged with conspiracy to defraud. Freelance writer AINSLEY WALTERS, discussed the issue with Edward Seaga, chairman of the PLCA.

Considering the turn of events, do you have any regrets about pursuing the Cash Plus sponsorship of the Premier League?

None at all. Cash Plus offered $50m. Last year it was $24m in sponsorship, of which we actually got $7m. This year we got $24m from Cash Plus, which is three and a half times what we got last year. Isn't that a good deal? We knew it was risky so we had to get a back-up, which has been at the Ministry of Finance for the longest while, from the previous government to this one.

What back-up, please explain?

The back-up was supposed to be the Prime Time Bingo. The proceeds from the bingo were supposed to be dedicated to football. If the bingo had been put through, we wouldn't have been facing any problems. That was our back-up.

How much due diligence was done before entering into such a major sponsorship deal with Cash Plus?

They had a fixed contract to pay us $6m per month and they paid right up to the end of January. Until determined by a court of law or an authority of competent jurisdiction, that Cash Plus was not a company to deal with, we took the decision to deal with them, and we did so as they were the only one to come forward. Wray and Nephew withdrew and were not in the running. We had no choice but to go with Cash Plus.

It is being said that the PLCA was disloyal to the previous sponsor, Wray and Nephew Limited, ditching them for Cash Plus, what's your take on these allegations?

The contract with Wray and Nephew expired and they did not seek to renew. That sponsorship agreement was with the Jamaica Football Federation, not the PLCA. They didn't put up a bid because we said we wanted $50m and they said they couldn't pay that. What has loyalty got to do with it? Money counts. They had a run of five years sponsorship and we would have continued to operate with them if they could have put up the funds.

Has there been a response to date from the Sports Development Foundation (SDF), from which the PLCA has requested emergency funding to continue the league?

There has been no response. It is under consideration.

Wray and Nephew's Andrew Price has gone on record, in the press, expressing a willingness to look at any proposal the PLCA has to resume sponsorship. Would the PLCA be looking Wray and Nephew's way next season?

I don't count any willingness until I see it in writing. I can't propose to them. They must say whether they're interested. The last thing I know was they said they were not interested. If they have a change of mind, we would be glad to talk to them.

There has been, in the past, talk of the league being viable through corporate Jamaica adopting teams, becoming part-owners, how realistic would this model be?

We would welcome it but I don't know of any member of corporate Jamaica being interested in becoming part-owners of clubs. However, I know Sporting Central is owned by a group of individuals. The others are mainly community teams. Corporate Jamaica is just not interested in that type of investment. It's not that they don't assist. At Tivoli, we go about it differently by selling billboard space and in some cases get direct contributions. I just don't believe they want to be involved in ownership.

How much does it cost a team to fund a season and do you believe Jamaica has the population and football fan base to support 12 Premier League teams?

Approximately $20m. The population is there to support it but the strain is getting worse and has reached the stage where it can't continue, hence the bingo being the only other answer we have. It would be a fairly reasonable way to support football, not fully support it. Full support means $250m per year.

FINAL WORD:

The PLCA has done well. As far as sponsorship is concerned, we were able to establish a separate Under-21 league, which, in former years, was an appendage to the Premier League, played the same day and just before the Premier League. We changed that and had a separate league, which is now getting recognition and is being reported in the press. Before that, it was totally overshadowed by the Premier League. In doing so, we got substantial support from Coca-Cola, the number one supporter of sporting events in the world. The Cash Plus problem was something which came about due to the nature of the product but we got much more from it than previous years and what we had planned as a back-up has not yet happened through no fault of ours. The fault lies elsewhere.

Was it a good decision by the Premier League Clubs Association (PLCA) to sign Cash Plus as the major sponsors of the National Premier League?

Ashley Elliott:

I think it was a good idea because the clubs were losing money and they couldn't get any major sponsors to give them so much money and so I think it was a good idea.

Alton McKenzie:

Yes, I think it was a good decision because the clubs didn't have any money at that time. I think the clubs would have benefited a lot more if certain things didn't reach Cash Plus.

Donovan Flynch:

Based on the previous sponsorships, I think Cash Plus was a key sponsor and I hope that they will free them up and so that they can continue to sponsor the clubs because they were benefiting from it more than Wray and Nephew.

Clifton Johnson:

I think so because the players on a hold were benefiting from it a lot and I think it was the right move to make Cash Plus the main sponsors for the National League.

Claudia Brown:

I say no because Cash Plus wasn't a legal entity under the FSC (Financial Services Commission) and therefore shouldn't have been allowed to sponsor any major event in Jamaica.

Roy Pryce:

At the time when the decision was made by the clubs association to sign with Cash Plus, I think it was an excellent decision based on the fact that nothing happened negatively up until now. A lot of people would say now that it wasn't an excellent decision because of the breakdown. I think for the short period of time that the contract was signed, the players benefited from it.