The majority of South Africans are outraged by the proposed R1 billion sponsorship deal between South African Tourism (SAT) and Tottenham Hotspur. The SAT Board and CEO have come out strongly to defend the decision. Having listened to the CEO’s impassioned media briefing there’s no doubt that (a) the board and executive understand their mandate; (b) the senior executive have done their business due diligence and estimated a potentially lucrative sponsorship return on investment by optimally positioning SA Tourism within one of the worlds most aggregated audiences, thus reaching the twenty four markets they targeting to visit South Africa.
The CEO’s bullish tone, however, suggests that SAT Board is removed from the hardships that SMMEs and ordinary South Africans are facing. The corruption, the crime, governance issues...the fury and frustration are being rattled off one after another in the dark hours of a debilitating power crisis. Businesses are shutting down, and there is all round uncertainty. The CEO missed an opportunity to address the public from a position of empathy and take into cognizance that the South Africans are gatvol (meaning ‘completely fed up’) of government initiatives that never benefit them directly.
Despite the Board’s good intentions the deal lacks timing. In deal making it is understood that any asset can be sold to the right partner at the right time, but that requires expertise in defining the right industries, the most likely companies, the correct executives and most importantly the timing to have these conversations. The reality is that public sector deal making must give serious consideration to the public interest (or good) so that the risk assessment mitigates against a public relations disaster. Moreover, in my view, South Africa is one of the most sort after tourist destinations. As such, the reason tourist aren’t flocking to our country isn’t because of a lack of marketing instead its the high levels of crime and lawlessness.
Charity begins at home
SAT Board is likely to forge ahead and conclude the deal despite the public outcry. From the media reports it seems both Tottenham Hotspur and SA Tourism are backing the economics behind the deal. Nevertheless, let me share 2 ideas that might achieve the similar objectives as envisaged by SA Tourism should there be a change of heart and mind.
Many of our national teams which travel around world are without headline sponsorships. SA cricket, for example, which broadcasts into the U.K, Australia and Asian draws large aggregated audiences, albeit not at the same level as the English Premier League. The ICC women’s world cup is taking place in South Africa in February and SAT would benefit immensely from the global exposure and give the brand relevance.
South Africa will host the Netball World Cup for the first time in its history in August this year and that event could do with support and increased awareness locally and abroad. Therefore, you can identify four national teams with global exposure and split R300 million across teams as sponsorships. I would also invest R200 million to Olympic Athletes development and marketing alone.
The remaining half a billion would be converted into a tourism voucher to given to South Africans through various platforms to ignite local tourism. This would support many SMMEs in the tourism industry.
It is trite to state that the ROI of spending in dollars and pounds will probably outweigh spending in the RANDS. But my consideration would be heavily influenced by public duty to the country and South African at large. Moreover, SA Tourism should be guided by anything that directly improves the welfare of South Africans to ameliorate their social conditions.