July 13, 2023 • 45 mins
The relationship between money and sport is complex…
This show has often discussed the issues that arise when the biggest carbon emitters buy or sponsor a sports club, often with the objective of improving their legitimacy or reputation. But this episode goes one step deeper, by looking at the more nuanced capital in-flows that have a few a degrees of separation.
For example, the organisations that invest in or fund others to extract fossil fuels, rather than doing it themselves. Additionally, there are businesses that continuously try to tempt the consumer into making key purchases that will cause significant harm either to the consumer or somewhere else along the supply chain. And because of that separation, it’s tricky for sports fans to know that the companies whose names adorn the fronts of their teams' jerseys are profiting from something they might not agree with.
But help is on the way. Michael Hardy has long sought to get his local team, Liverpool FC, to drop Standard Chartered as a sponsor. Standard chartered fund in a range of projects across the world that do not uphold the human rights of their workers and are responsible for a massive about of emissions. To try to make a difference, Michael and Platform, the organisation he works for, are launching the Game Changer Sponsorship Pledge: an exciting new initiative that tries to bring everyone who cares about sport but does not want to benefit from harm-causing activities. They want to put pressure on sports commercial directors to make better choices that better reflect the values of the fans, even if that means less lucrative deals.
You can learn more about the Game Changer Sponsorship Pledge at: badverts.org/gamechanger
Please feel free to reach out to the show on
Web: sustainingsport.com
Instagram: @sustainingsport
Linkedin: /sustaining-sport
Facebook: @sustainingsport
Twitter: @SustainSportPod
Now on Bluesky /sustainingsport.bsky.social
or contact us at: benmole@sustainingsport.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Ben (00:10):
Welcome back to the sustaining sport podcast.
The relationship between moneyand sport is complex.
This show has touched on manyof the issues of
over-commercialization.
Then again, if there was zeromoney involved, then athletes
couldn't compete to their fullpotential while simultaneously
paying their bills.
As we continue to make sense ofwhere between these extremes
(00:32):
would sport be best placed, Ipromise today's discussion will
not be another tirade againstthe direct oil money ownership,
although, given the scale of thetakeover moves that the Saudi
Sovereign Welfunder areattempting, it is hard not to
obsess over that.
Rather, today we are looking atthe more nuanced capital
inflows that have a few degreesof separation, for example, the
(00:53):
organizations that invest in orfund others to go out and
extract fossil fuels rather thandoing it themselves.
Additionally, there arebusinesses that continuously try
and tempt the consumer intomaking key purchases that will
cause significant harm either tothe consumer or somewhere else
along the supply chain.
Because of that separation, itis very tricky for sports fans
(01:15):
to know that the company whosename adorns the front of their
team's jersey is profiting fromsomething that they might not
agree with.
But help is on the way.
Michael Hardy has long sought toget his local team, liverpool
Football Club to drop StandardChartered as a sponsor.
He argues that StandardChartered's funding of projects
across the world that do notuphold the human rights of their
(01:36):
workers and are responsible fora massive amount of emissions
are not in line with the valuesof the team that he supports.
To try and make a difference,michael and Platform, the
organization he works for, arelaunching the Game Changer
sponsorship pledge, an excitingnew initiative that tries to
bring together everyone whocares about sport but does not
want to benefit from majorharm-causing activities.
(01:58):
They aim to put pressure onsports commercial directors to
make better choices, choicesthat better represent the clubs
and athletes' values, even ifthat means smaller money deals.
I hope you find Michael'spassion as infectious as I do.
In fact, he is so passionate.
We had a few issues with hismicrophone, which I hope you
will forgive, but I believeremaining gallant in the face of
(02:19):
a daunting task often requiresexactly that kind of passion.
So please enjoy thisconversation with Michael Hardy.
Welcome, michael, to theSustaining Sport podcast.
(02:40):
Cheers Ben, nice to be here.
So let's just begin at thebeginning, shall we?
Where did your relationshipwith sport begin, so?
Michael (02:50):
I grew up in Anfield.
As you can already probablytell, I'm from Liverpool and I'm
a big Liverpool fan.
I live in Anfield, in theshadow of the stadium.
I live very, very close to theground and it's a huge part of
people's lives, like it is upand down the country and around
the world.
Football plays a fundamentalpart in growing up in the area
(03:10):
that you live in and what itmeans to be a Liverpool fan,
especially with the culture thatyou have around, being a
specific supporter of Liverpool,a supporter of football and all
that comes along with that.
I've always tried to go to asmany games as I can at Anfield
and it's always been somethingthat I've enjoyed to do and
something that I've cared a lotabout.
Ben (03:30):
That's fantastic and, I must say, it's so great for me
to know you as a local Liverpoolfan because, in the nature of
the sporting world that wesupport, I know thousands of
Liverpool fans, basically, andvery few of them are from
Liverpool.
It is just the nature of theworld we live in.
So yeah, on that topic, how hasyour relationship with the club
changed since you were a boy?
Michael (03:53):
Well, the success of the club has definitely improved
since I was younger.
This was an achievement I hadmore recently at Champions
League and Premier Leaguesuccesses.
But my relationship more broadlycomes from embracing the
positives that being a Liverpoolfan has, but also being more
(04:14):
acutely aware of some of theproblems and some of the
criticisms that you have aroundthe relationships that the club
has with other industries andthe way they impact that they
put out in terms of differentareas as well.
So I know these being likecontroversial sponsorship deals
that you've been aware of interms of some of these things
(04:34):
and that kind of tarnishes, someof the kind of relationship
that you do have to some extentin the disappointment in your
club and the brand and thevalues of sport and the club you
support being associated withthose things.
But also the disappointment interms of the stuff that was
surrounding the European SuperLeague and things like that in
terms of the commercialisationof football, as it definitely
(04:56):
increased and not saying itdidn't exist 20 years ago, but
you've definitely seen that rampup in the way Money controls
football and controls sport morebroadly.
So it's definitely overall,it's still a great thing to be a
small fan, still a great thingto be a football fan.
Ben (05:13):
Absolutely, and I think my friends who are Newcastle
supporters will probably be abit sick of me constantly
getting a bit irritable abouttheir current ownership model.
Obviously, everyone knows aboutPSG's ownership model man City
but let's keep focusing onLiverpool, let's try and be
self-critical, because we'reboth Liverpool fans.
What is Liverpool's sponsorshipsituation?
(05:34):
Because I think just becausethe ownership may not be as
starkly quite a quiteirresponsible as some of the
others doesn't mean that it'sall sunshine and rainbows.
Michael (05:45):
No, absolutely, and Liverpool is a big culprit in
terms of negative sponsorshipdeals that it does have it's
front to.
Shared sponsor is StandardChartered Bank, which is a huge
fossil fuel financer.
There's a conversation thatpeople don't always realise
because most people in thiscountry aren't able to have a
standard Chartered Bank accounts, so a lot of people aren't
(06:07):
familiar with what StandardChartered is, let alone what
their practices are and how theyinvest their money in other
areas.
For instance, like.
One of the mind blown kind offigures for me is that in 2021
alone, standard Chartered Bankinvested in fossil fuel
expansion projects that willemit 2.3 billion tonnes of CO2
(06:27):
within those projects lifetime.
That's five times the entireemissions of the UK 3.3 billion
tonnes.
I can't even comprehend howlarge a number that is and how
much impact that that's going tohave on our planet, the people
that live on this planet and thefuture of sport, as well, as a
(06:48):
knock on effect of that too.
But the amount of money that'sbeing plowed in is a standard,
too, in terms of £46 billion hasbeen plowed into fossil fuel
expansion projects since 2016 byStandard Chartered.
So these are large sums of moneyand huge, huge emissions, which
is ultimately driving climatechange and threatening the
(07:08):
future of sport.
And it doesn't stop there.
Like the, liverpool itself hascommercial partnerships with
other industries and with otherareas as well, such as
Petro-Canada, which I think thename says on the tin, just quite
what that's about there.
It's just ludicrous, in my view, to be able to say which
Liverpool does and is asignatory of the UN Sports and
(07:29):
Climate Action Framework, basedon its pledging commitment
towards that.
What has allowed and continuesto push sponsorship deals with
these climate reckon industriesand climate reckon sponsors.
I don't think those two thingscan mute and I don't think the
representative of what thevalues of sport are.
I don't think therepresentative of what the fans
want the club to berepresentative of.
(07:49):
Yeah, we love Liverpool.
I love Liverpool as a footballclub.
I live in the shadow of itsstadium and, quite literally, I
can see the stadium from mybedroom window.
I love being a Liverpool fan.
But that doesn't absolve us ofresponsibility to criticise the
things that the club is doingwrong and the things that the
club should be doing better andworking to improve, and, I think
(08:11):
, its sustainability of itscommercial department and the
relationship it strikes withsponsors should definitely be
something that they improve onand be a focal point of the club
moving forward, becauseultimately, the research that is
out there, sport is alreadybeing drastically impacted by
the climate crisis and you won'tsee football by 2050.
(08:34):
You'll see the majority ofPremier League clubs
experiencing fixture delays dueto flooding and other weather
events.
That just won't be the same ifsport doesn't get real and clubs
don't get real and take climateaction, not just about the
sustainability of their stadiumsand operations, but the brands
that they promote.
I think always one that strikesme as being quite ludicrous is
(08:56):
the fact that Premier League hasan official engine oil sponsor.
Why is that a category ofsponsorship that we need to have
in football?
It's a nonsense.
Obviously you've got othersthat come in there, and every
club, especially every PremierLeague club, will have
relationships with the fossilfuel industry and will have
(09:19):
relationships with industriesthat are problematic.
You just look at the amount ofclubs that have gambling
sponsors as well.
It's a huge, huge problem, andthe social and climate impacts
of sponsorship deals issomething that I think sport
needs to start really takingseriously.
Ben (09:35):
What do you think standard charters are getting out of it?
Because, as you say, in the UKyou can't open a standard
chartered bank account.
So what exactly are standardcharters aims of being on
Liverpool's front of shirt?
Why are they giving them?
I think it was 50 million quida year.
Why are they giving them thatmoney?
Michael (09:51):
Well, quite simply, sponsorship works.
People will start to associatethis research out there that
suggests that people will havethat with the strong emotions
that are surrounding their teamand the sport they love.
They'll start to associatepositive emotions with the
brands that are associated withthat sponsor and with that
company.
A lot of people I speak torecognise standard charters as
(10:12):
Liverpool's share sponsor, butthey don't actually know much
about standard charters, whatits operations are more
generally and whether it's abank, especially with the large
clubs.
The international element meansthat it has a far greater reach
than what, than just the UKviewership.
In fact, with the lack ofrestrictions or less
(10:34):
restrictions on watching matchesand what not, around the globe
compared to the UK, more peoplefrom countries where standard
chartered bank does operate,we'll see more games and be more
televised games than will be inthe UK.
So every time you see Mo Salahscore a goal and standard
chartered and blazing on thefront of the shirt and it's
(10:57):
beamed across the world and thatpositive association between
Liverpool, that emotion thatyou're feeling and that brand is
there.
And these are the areas aroundthe globe where standard
chartered are invested in fossilfuel expansion projects Across
Asia, across Africa and furtherafield as well, and what it'll
(11:18):
try and do is it'll point toother things that we're working
on to say, oh, we're doing thisclimate responsibly or what not?
We're being more sustainable inthis area, but ultimately they
are still investing in fossilfuel expansion projects, whether
that have been previous yearsand things like the liquefied
natural gas pipeline inMozambique and the devastation
(11:41):
that that's caused and the thiswill continue to cause in terms
of the extraction of gas,whether it be the jazan power
plant and other projects thatare invested in.
There are doing numerousprojects that are invested in.
Ben (11:55):
Yeah, I find these particular numbers quite hard to
digest, just as a human beingon planet earth, because there's
always an argument betweenone's personal climate actions
and the sort of systemic, moreindustrial ones, and I do think
it's both.
Some people say, oh, any formof carbon footprint is a myth
and that you should just liveyour life and these oil
companies are responsible, andthat is to a degree true.
(12:17):
But at the same time there areactions we can take in our daily
lives to reduce our emissions.
But then when you put thenumbers there, it's quite
demoralizing.
I say, this summer, right, I'vegot a wedding in Italy, for
example, in October, and I'm notgoing by plane, I'm going to
get the train there.
But one obviously check myprivilege that I can get the
train there, that I can affordit because the trains aren't
cheap.
But two, you know you're savinga sort of a couple hundred
(12:39):
kilograms of CO2 by not takingthat thing.
And then you hear this numberfrom standard charted and you're
like, ah, it's frustrating.
You know, it does sort of makeyou quite angry.
And I think your point aboutMozambique was an interesting
one, where if you go to likeMaputo and you walk around, I
guarantee you.
You will see a Liverpool shirtsomewhere but one.
I'm not blaming them for that.
Of course they don't have tohave that association, but it
(13:01):
seems a weird concept that youcould almost walk around with
the branding of a company thatis negatively impacting both
planet and your country and youknow fellow citizens but also be
quite happy about it.
Michael (13:13):
No, absolutely, and all that is the design, isn't it?
The design for sponsorship insport is to create those
positive relationships and thepositive feelings that people
have towards the brand and theclubs that they love to support.
You're absolutely right.
This doesn't shouldn't mean, inmy view, that you shouldn't
support Liverpool as a result ofthese things.
I'm a massive Liverpool fan.
(13:34):
I'll continue to be a massiveLiverpool fan for my whole life
and, however, it does give aresponsibility of people who are
aware of the situation of thesponsorships to use their voice
to be able to call that out andto spread that message around
the problems that it does have.
I think that is, I think that's,the crucial thing, because
(13:54):
these companies have globalreach.
Liverpool has a global reach,it reaches people right across
the world and it has to be madeaware and has to be called out
that the practices of our mainshare sponsor are really, really
damaging.
They're awful, they're havingawful consequences in the
countries that they wereexpanding, doing the fossil fuel
expansion projects in, andthere hasn't a huge impact on
(14:16):
the climate right across acrossthe globe, and so I think it's
important that we do call outthese, these actions, especially
for making the argument againstfossil fuel banks which often
is slightly more complicated, tokind of degree of separation
that they use a sponsorship tobe able to fund the fossil fuel
industry, because it's the banksthat are providing the money
(14:38):
flashed the, the underwritingfrom insurance companies and
whatnot, to be able to carry outthe fossil fuel expansion
projects that wouldn't happenwithout their support.
So it's important to conveythat message.
Ben (14:49):
We've talked about standard charter.
We've talked about Petro-Canada.
What do you think of somethinglike Expedia, where they're not
directly responsible for theemissions?
You know the company ofExpedia's carbon footprint isn't
that high, but obviously if youwatch Expedia advert you have
Ewan McGregor or somethingtelling you to hop on a plane
which is high carbon footprint.
What do you make of that kindof sponsorship?
Michael (15:10):
I think what you find with everyone who talks about
high carbon sponsorship is thateveryone will have a slightly
different kind of like window interms of like how far the nets
should be cast in these things.
Absolutely, it's promotingother industries and directing
you to other industries that arehigh carbon related, obviously
being air travel being that mainone, and you see large examples
(15:33):
of airlines being sponsored inthe Premier League and in
support, notably the Emiratesand Etihad.
It's definitely something thatshould be discussed and it
should be something that isconsidered by commercial
departments within clubs whenthey strike in these deals.
It's comparative really, isn'tit?
In terms of the understandingthat, yes, that's problematic
and is related to the fossilfuel industry, but it's not the
(15:59):
airline itself.
So it's understanding thatdistinction and understanding
that it is a negative sponsor,like it's not a sponsor that is
going to be the best one to havein terms of if you're taking
environmental impacts seriously,but it's not the same in terms
of its direct impact as StandardChartered Bank or Emirates
Airlines or Etihad Airlines.
So there's a complexity to thatkind of discussion, but it's
(16:20):
definitely something that Ithink should be included in the
discussions that commercialdepartments are having in
relation to sustainability,because it's really important
that sustainability and thesocial impacts of sponsorships
are really at the heart of whatcommercial departments are
considering when they'restriking new deals.
And let's not make no bone tothis Sport is a lucrative
(16:42):
sponsorship opportunity forevery company around the world.
There's no shortage ofcompanies that want to use sport
to sponsor their brand.
There's no shortage.
I don't think there's probablyvery few companies that wouldn't
want their company on the frontof a Premier League shirt.
So there are otheropportunities out there for
sponsorship to bring the revenueinto clubs.
(17:03):
That doesn't have to rely onthe fossil fuel or high carbon
industries to do that.
Ben (17:09):
Yeah, you're highlighting some interesting ones.
I think the downside of the badcompanies, I guess, is that the
companies that are the mostquote unquote, exploitative or
who are taking these mining betsfossil fuel bets, whatever bets
and that's paying off.
You know, sadi Ramco is thebiggest company in the world,
most profitable company in theworld have the money to tempt in
the most of the goodwillinstitutions, like whatever
(17:33):
Liverpool or such, or even, forexample, someone like you and
McGregor, but on top of that,they have the most incentive to
do so because people have pissedoff at them because of their
dodgy action.
So it's a little bit of chickenand the egg of like.
The bad ones have the money andthe most incentive to give you
the money.
You know, I feel terrible foran organization like Forest
Green Rovers, because how dothey go around and get a
(17:56):
sustainable sponsor that'll givethem a huge amount of money?
I'm sure some will give themsome money, but they just know
that some vegan food companiesdon't actually need that much of
a you know, image cleanse.
They might need a bit of morereach and of course, there'll
still be the aim for that, butthey might not need a bit of
image cleanse.
Michael (18:13):
And you're right in saying that the ones with the
most money are the people, thecompanies that can stack up the
most offers in terms of givingclubs money for sponsorship
deals.
However, as a percentage, interms of what they give, based
on their overall investments andother things, it's incredibly
small amount of money inindividual deals.
(18:34):
And that's not to say thatincreasing the amount of
sponsorship deals would makethese sponsorships goods or
better.
It absolutely wouldn't.
But to point out the fact thatyou mentioned before, it's
believed that standard chartereddeal would live across around
50 million pounds a year.
That is a fraction, a fractionof 1% that they've come into the
fossil fuel industry since thesigning of the Parrot Accord.
(18:56):
That's an insubstantial amountof money to them for the benefit
that they get from that, theamount of people that reaches so
.
It's always important, I think,to contextualize that.
You know the way football andfinances have gone recently.
50 million pounds isn't a huge,huge sum of money in the wide
(19:17):
scope of the scheme of things.
They are like, you see, theChampions League drop Gazprom
overnight, essentially after theRussia's invasion of Ukraine,
and replaced it relativelyquickly with another sponsor,
and that wasn't difficult forthem to do, and the finances
were impacted by that, that thecost of the deal was similar.
(19:40):
I think it may have even beenslightly higher.
So they are companies out thereand you're right as well.
Between the different leaguesand the different levels of the
game at different points, thesize of those deals will vary.
Ben (19:53):
You raise a valid point there about the that they were
able to get a new sponsor thatquickly after Gazprom.
So why didn't they just get onein the first place?
Why did it take an invasion ofa sovereign nation to change
sponsorships?
And I mean, if I'm gonna takethe Nihilist view and I don't
have this view in my day-to-daylife but to take the Nihilist
view, I'm almost annoyed.
The standard charted we don'task standard charted for more.
(20:15):
Like you know, they're givingus well, we just signed
McAllister for 35 million.
They're giving us 1.7McAllisters per season,
basically to get their brand onthe front of every eyeball who
watches a game of ChampionsLeague football.
It seems well not ChampionsLeague next year.
Michael (20:32):
That's a sort of thought that bad, yeah exactly.
Ben (20:36):
Champions League winning football in the last couple of
years, Premier League winningfootball in the last couple of
years, and they only gave us 50million, Like it just seems like
Liverpool sort of had acompletely morally bankrupt
themselves for, as you say, notthat huge amount of money in the
grand scheme.
Michael (20:52):
Absolutely and obviously I don't hold the view
that increasing that to any sumof money would make that sponsor
any better in any way, shape orform.
But it does put into contextthe value that these companies
are able to get In relation tothe cost that they're paying.
Ultimately, these companiessponsor sports and sponsor
(21:12):
football because it works,because it produces more money
for them than they have put onelse.
And it's obvious why there iswhen you see, in terms of
comparatives to means, theamount of money, that the
profits that these companiesmakes, what they're giving in
sponsorship deals, are reallysmall amounts of money in
comparison to the rest of theprofits and industries You're
(21:34):
right to say like it's in thenihilist view, people are like,
oh well, they can afford to givemore.
But that is not the solution tothis.
The solution is to move awayfrom these industries and move
into less problematic industriesand industries that aren't
causing social harm to peoplewho consume sports or to the
planet as well.
Ben (21:53):
And I think, going back to the sort of airline points or
the travel points, it becomesquite difficult when it becomes
quite difficult for theseorganizations not to do it, when
I think the bigger distanceinvolved, the more money can be
leveraged.
And I'll give you exampleObviously, the most recent
Champions League final was inIstanbul and really cool
organizations like Fossil FreeFootball were saying well, hang
(22:17):
on, it's an Italian team playinga team from Manchester, why not
have the game in Paris, like itwas last year?
And it makes it sogeographically reasonable.
But of course, the entirebuildup to the final involved,
you know, liverpool's very ownStephen Gerrard in a sponsorship
campaign from Turkish Airlines,because they're not hosting the
final, because the owners ofTurkish Airlines want to watch
(22:38):
football, even though they maydo.
They're hosting the final therebecause they can use that event
and the eyeballs to incentivizepeople to travel to these
places.
And then I think we get there'sa knowing thing where they kind
of want to offset the guilt ofthe travel onto the end consumer
.
And me, being an end consumerin this case, then feels the
(22:58):
guilt because, you know, thensuddenly my friend, because they
watched the Champions Leaguefinals, says, oh, I want to do
my destination wedding inIstanbul.
That's great, that's cool.
But then I'm now that goessitting at home turning down my
friend's wedding because I can'tget to Istanbul without hopping
on a plane.
So you know they almost createthe problem and then say to the
consumer you solve it if youcare about sustainability.
(23:19):
So it's a really fierce cycle,of which football and you know
sport in general is tied up in.
Michael (23:25):
Yeah, you're absolutely right, and what you've just
described there is literally thereason why they want to sponsor
sports.
Why these industries want tosponsor sports gets the positive
relationship.
It creates revenue for them.
To do so creates opportunitiesthat they can tap into to make
themselves more money and maketheir businesses even more
profitable.
Because these aren't industries, by the way, these aren't
(23:47):
companies that are struggling toget money.
These aren't companies that arestruggling to get by.
They want to increase theirprofit margins even more so in a
way that is completelyun-tustainable within the planet
, as it is currently in theclimate crisis that we face, and
one of the impacts of theclimate crisis is that, within
the next few decades, sport willbe un-recognisable.
(24:09):
You see how frequently the sportencounters are disrupted now,
in terms of sport and weatherinstances around the world
flooding, extreme heat.
You've seen today some of thereports.
I think there was an article inReuters talking about the
Mexican national games, wherethese teams that have matches
are being canceled.
(24:29):
Teams have walked off the pitch, athletes have been
hospitalized due to extreme heatand the extreme weather there.
You've seen grand prix floodedoff.
You've seen football matchesaround the world cancels for
weather events, and this is onlygoing to get worse, is the
climate crisis gripped harder,the devastation in terms of that
is going to happen to theplanet is going to worsen and
(24:51):
the impact that it'll have onfans, athletes and the sport and
calendar is going to be evenlarger.
And this is why it's now is thetime as the climate crisis
grips harder.
Now is really the time forgoverning bodies, for sports
teams and sports organisationsto really serious the issues of
sustainability and includesponsorship deals in them,
(25:14):
because it's really importantthat they do the things they can
to make their stadiums and maketheir operations as sustainable
as possible, but to ignore thefact that they're promoting
hugely, hugely pollutingindustries and fossil fuel banks
and fossil fuel companies iscompletely counter the trying to
(25:34):
make by making their stadiumsand their operations more
sustainable.
Like you look around at some ofthe most egregious examples of
fossil fuel sponsorship in worldfootball and you look at the
African corporations which aresponsored by Total, which is
just completely outrageous to beable to do that, and they still
use their brand to sponsorsports right across the world
(25:58):
and they're having a devastating.
Total's operations are havingthis devastating impact on the
planet, the people all over theworld and the communities where
they're having their fossil fuelexpansion projects, and for
sports to kind of tend to blindeye to that is unsustainable,
it's completely ridiculous andit's immoral.
And sports need to look thosearguments right in the face and
(26:21):
resolve them and move to severthe relationships that they have
with these industries, becausesports should be used as a
vehicle for good and not tothreaten the future of sport
itself and have a devastatingimpact on people on planet.
Ben (26:37):
I think the Africa one is a super complex situation where,
from particularly a macroperspective, it's hard to say
that Africa doesn't deservemoney being put in, you know.
So, in theory, if those Totalinvestments would be trickling
down through the system andhelping people in underdeveloped
regions, et cetera, et cetera,you could maybe make the
(26:58):
argument.
But one I'm not always sure ifthat is the case and it's very
hard to verify that that's thecase and two, it does set up
this weird incentive that Ithink a lot of billionaires and
big companies run into where italmost seems to suit you the
best, to do something wrong, dosomething bad, do something that
exploits either other humanbeings or the environment,
(27:19):
leverage a huge amount of moneyfrom that or gain a huge amount
of money from that.
Then take some of that moneyand put it to something like a
sports tournament or a rewildingproject or anything like that,
and say look at the great thingwe're doing, which you can't.
Then say that's not a greatthing you're doing.
You know I can't specificallysay Total's money into African
football is a bad thing, but ofcourse, what are they leveraging
(27:42):
back?
They're leveraging a falsereputation.
We're saying that Total is aquote, unquote.
Good company and it neverbalances out.
They're never putting in enoughmoney into Africa.
Then they're taking out ofAfrica in the form of fossil
fuel expansion and humanexploitation.
So it's a really frustratingthing that you know.
If you go on the internetyou'll see.
You won't believe what thisperson has done good with their
(28:03):
money.
But where do they get the money?
And yeah, obviously,particularly in the cases of
companies, they're facelessorganizations.
There's no individual that ismasterminding this, so it's
almost impossible to say thatthey're who's doing the wrong
thing.
But it's very interesting.
Michael (28:17):
But what you've described there quite eloquently
is what greenwashing andsportswashing is, and they use
this to launder the reputationsand to promote a positive image
for themselves, whilst doingthings that are completely
immoral and morally bankrupt anddamaging to people and planning
.
I understand you're saying like,obviously African football
(28:39):
deserves investments and whatnot.
That is not going to that I'mmaking.
But the investments thatthey're getting from a fossil
fuel company, directly from afossil fuel company, threatens
the future of football andthreatens the planet and
threatens the livelihoods andthe communities of people right
across the world and within thecommunities within Africa with
(29:01):
some of the fossil fuelexpansion projects that they're
directly involved with there.
So that's why they do itthrough greenwashing and
sportswashing to say, oh, we'veused this money to do this great
project or that great project.
But when you kind of put thatinto perspective and turn to
their operations and the impactthat they're more broadly having
, they're far less significantthan the negative impact that
(29:23):
they're having.
So I understand the argumentthat the football needs
investment and whatnot, or itshould not be reliant and should
not be taking money from theindustries that are threatening
the future of sport.
Ben (29:37):
I think also it's so difficult when the distances and
the disconnect you have fromthese companies Like if I was to
come up with some kind of realworld example if we were in the
neighborhood and someone had,like, a lemonade stand and they
had cut costs on their lemonadeproduction by putting rotten
lemonade in the lemonade butmaking a profit on doing so, and
(29:57):
then reinvested that profitinto, like a local swimming pool
, but we all got sick from thelemons.
We wouldn't say, oh, well, donefor building a swimming pool.
Thank you very much.
How the hell did you just dothat?
But because these companies aremiles away, we don't necessarily
directly see every day theactions on the ground and all
this kind of stuff, particularlyfor people in these situations
in Africa, that they only maybesee in the short term.
(30:21):
Oh, but a money coming in fromtotal, that's fine, cool, Great.
But of course, if you take thesystems perspective or the
broads perspective, like this isnot sustainable exactly as you
phrase.
But now let's talk about yourwork, because obviously all my
listeners will hear the passionthat you talk about, the stuff
and the details that you have.
How have you turned all of yourpassion and motivation and
(30:43):
fixing the system into a career?
Michael (30:47):
So I began where I first met you, ben, a few years
back, working for anorganization called Ploughful,
and I was a freelancer at thetime and I was involved with a
few others in running a campaigncalled Fossil Free LFC and that
was directly as thisconversation started with about
the relationship betweenLiverpool Football Club and
(31:08):
Standard Chartered Bank, andthrough that way I got involved
with discussions with fans.
I think, within this whole kindof sustainability and campaign
and then trying to change this,the way football uses
sponsorship and thesustainability is both involving
fans in that discussion andpart of that campaign is crucial
.
One of the things thatregularly came up during
(31:30):
discussions with fans is oncethey conveyed the message of the
problems around StandardChartered and they would broadly
accept that Standard Charteredwere not a good company to
sponsor Liverpool was the factthat there was an understanding
that there were other areas ofsponsorship that are negative,
and I now work for platform andwe're working on the campaign
(31:53):
and the sponsorship pledge thatdrives together those three
areas in terms of the clubs,fans and athletes to bring those
people together to campaignabout what we're calling harmful
sponsorship, and those harmfulsponsorship are present that
we're looking at in terms of thecampaigns that exist the High
Carbon, which is what I'vediscussed here quite in depth
with yourself today, andgambling companies and the
(32:18):
alcohol industry as well.
All of those have gotestablished campaigns in
different areas and what not?
Against those types ofsponsorship.
Because what I see this is apledge to bring those
stakeholders for sport, butthat's broadly what they are.
The clubs, the fans, theathletes bring those people
together to break what Idescribe as the cycle of harmful
(32:39):
sponsorship, how we switchbetween these harmful sponsors.
Like you go back, and tobaccosponsorship was the only
sponsorship in town in sportsand practically anything at one
stage.
If it wasn't sponsored byTobacco, then it wasn't
happening at one point, and nowthat became a thing of the past.
And alcohol industries,gambling industries, high carbon
(33:01):
industries came into that spacewithin sport, within football,
and they chop and change betweenthose industries.
What this pledge aims to do isto bring together all those
groups of people that I've justdescribed to break that cycle,
to say our sport, our clubs, ourteams that we love to support
(33:21):
don't need to be reliant onmoney from these industries.
It causes harm to fans and itthreatens the future of the game
.
So we need to be really engagedin those three areas, get as
many mobilised behind the pledgethat we've referred to as the
game changer sponsorship pledge,because that's what we're
really ultimately hoping to do.
We're hoping to change the game.
(33:42):
It's hoping that this will be agame changer in the way that we
review sports sponsorshipmoving forward.
We've spoke a lot about football, but this is not narrowly
minded through trouble.
This is a sports sponsorshippledge.
So we want to engage with allsports, we want to engage with
(34:04):
all sporting organisations andwe want to go with those people
on a journey from thatacceptance to commitment of not
extending deals, not renewingdeals, not signing deals with
these industries and that's whatI hope this really does as an
opportunity to do, but reallypositively for a sport that can
(34:24):
continue to thrive.
We've talked about all thenegatives of these relationships
that exist, but it doesn't haveto be that way.
Our engagements within thisprocess and our campaign and our
voices do matter because, asyou've heard the phrase all the
time and I think sports fans arekey to this, because you'll
hear it in football all the timeand across all the sports Sport
(34:45):
without fans is nothing.
So the voice of fans, the voiceof athletes, is really, really
important within this inbringing these areas together
and really putting thesediscussions on the agenda so
that the powers that be, theorganisations, the government
bodies that make these decisions, the clubs and the
organisations, can't ignore it.
They can't ignore it.
(35:06):
We have to put it on the agendaand they have to take us
seriously.
We've got to come together andcreate the environment where
they can't ignore us, where theyhave to take us seriously,
where they have to start to takeaction, because at some point
that we know in terms of highcarbon frontiers, they must know
that at some point that it willbe unignorable.
(35:28):
And what we're asking them todo is to get on board early.
I say early, get on boardearlier, before any legislative
change is going to come in andbe part of the change that we
can actually see in sports, totry and protect its future and
protect its fans and supportersand the athletes that compete in
it.
Ben (35:47):
Yeah, I think there's definitely a first mover
advantage here, and it seemsridiculous that we have to say
the phrase first mover when itcomes to climate in 2023.
But if you can get on therecord now and say that this
stuff's got to change from, asyou say, industry stakeholder
perspective, it's a hugeadvantage.
Because the point that oncefootball stadiums are literally
regularly under water, you'renot going to get any brownie
(36:10):
points, quote unquote by saying,oh yeah, we need to do
something about climate.
It has to be now or probably 10years ago, but here we are now.
And I also think one of thestruggles when it comes to this
kind of changes communication,coordination I think you'll
often find a couple ofstakeholders are sort of
separated, but they actuallythink in the same way.
So your, your idea here ofbringing people together, coming
(36:31):
up with some kind of cohesivenext step, and you guys
providing the pun intendedplatform for that next step, is
exceptionally powerful.
I'd also say that, first of all, football without without
devokary is nothing.
That's one thing we mustremember.
But exactly that you know, assoon as the, the, the fans, get
involved at a quite asubstantive level, then exactly,
(36:53):
football without fans isnothing and, as you say, that
applies to all sports, not justfootball.
And this is, I think, a reallyexciting next step.
What?
What's the actual process forclubs to get involved?
You know, if there's a clublistening to this right now,
what would you said them interms of how they can join this,
this action?
Michael (37:11):
So we'll hope to have, by the time this goes out we
hope to that this will havelaunched as a pledge and and
it'll be hosted, and this workis being will be hosted in
partnership with both platformand bad reticent and the pledge
will be hosted on both of thosewebsites and the contact
information will be included onthose websites.
And any organization that wantsto get involved and wants to
(37:34):
sign up, wants to have aconversation, wants to discuss
this more, will be able to getin contact with myself and we
can.
We can discuss that further.
See, the more people thatpledge support and sign up for,
the better what we want to havesessions with people to.
We understand that that if it'sclubs that want to go on board,
that they'll probably be ajourney and these are the that
(37:56):
those clubs need to go on,because I don't think these are
and I don't can't think of aclub off the top of my head that
doesn't have a relationshipwith at least one of these
industries covered in thesponsorship pledge.
So there will be a journey thatsome of these sports teams and
organizations will need to go on.
So that starts with therecognition that these
sponsorship, sponsorship fromthese industries, is harmful and
(38:16):
we need to move away from themto safeguard sport and to
safeguard our supporters and tosafeguard society more broadly.
And I think that's that's,that's the starting point to get
in touch once once, once we'relaunched which should be when
this goes out and having contact.
If you're interested inspeaking more, if you want, if
you've got an organization, ifyou've got a link to an
(38:38):
organization that you thinkcould be, would be keen to
discuss this further, then I'mavailable and always open to
discussion and engaging andtrying to make positive change
happen.
Ben (38:49):
How would you say this pledge that you're putting
forward differs from, likesports for climate action
framework, which so manyorganizations have put their
hands up and said, oh, yes, yesto this, but then it didn't seem
to go one step beyond?
How are you guys going toensure that, once people have
bought you know, bought into thethe principle that they take
those next steps?
Michael (39:09):
And so I think the terms of the commitments are
within our pledge, specificallyaround sponsorship or calling
for a move in the way from thoseareas of sponsorship.
So these are much more tangiblerecourse, to kind of point out a
form of hypocrisy.
So if someone signs up to saywe've committed to phasing out
these industries, or whateverstage we've phased out this
(39:32):
industry that we've described inthis with a view to phasing out
more, you can tangibly seethrough their commercial
relationship and theirsponsorship deals whether they
are doing that or not.
We don't want this to be takenas the opportunity to be a
greenwashing exercise for clubsto go We've signed this, we've
done great things, kind ofthings.
We definitely want to make surethat these, like the commitment
(39:53):
to doing this, is a commitmentto actually carrying out what
they, what they say they'regoing to do.
And I think, with it beingabout sponsorship and it
discusses sponsorship in a waythat the framework doesn't and
an existence of harm, and Ithink for clubs to step up and
take that responsibility willshow that they're ahead of the
well, will be ahead of the curveof most football and sporting
(40:15):
clubs out there that haven't yetor won't want to accept the
harm that these industries do.
Ben (40:23):
That's a really smart way of doing it.
I think a lot of the goods thatcomes in sport is actually
quite intangible, and then Ithink some sports clubs may like
to pretend that some of the badstuff is also intangible.
As you say, something like asponsorship thing is very black
and white on paper.
It's very tangible.
So the actions are there, likeon the 1st of July or wherever,
baby, you have this sponsor,where you at 1st of July 2024,
(40:47):
where you in the 1st of July2025.
If you still got the sponsors,you're still doing the wrong
thing.
So that's that's quite exciting, I think.
Just to sort of end thisconversation, I always like to
try and find some, somepositivity on this and I think
your passion is really speakingthrough here.
But how optimistic are youabout?
You know won the success ofthis campaign.
But on top of that, just in thechange of the industry, do you
(41:08):
believe that the industry canchange in a meaningful and
responsible way?
Michael (41:13):
Well, I'm positive about the fact that I want to
reach as many people as I canwith this discussion.
Do I think that in theimmediate term, we're going to
see the largest clubs around theworld sign up to this?
No, I don't.
But do I think that we cancreate positive change by
engaging with fans and engagingwith athletes and engaging with
the clubs at different levels ofthe game?
We start putting this as adiscussion point and start
(41:34):
putting this on the agenda.
We have these discussionsbecause we need to make these,
these arguments and put them onthe agenda.
They need to be in a positionwhere they can't be ignored, and
they will be ignored unless,unless we shout loud enough,
unless we start making actionsand doing things that mean they
can't ignore us in this way.
And this is a positive way ofdoing this in terms of getting
(41:55):
people on board and engagingwith clubs and try and get them
on this journey with us to beahead of the curve of what a lot
of sports clubs are.
I do think these are a lot ofpositivity to have.
I think these lots of optionsas I've set out earlier for
clubs to look elsewhere forsponsorship deals and not be
reliant on these industries?
Do I think this is a huge, ahuge task?
(42:15):
Absolutely Do.
I think it's going to be a longterm thing to try and get to
the point where we need to be inrelation to sports and
sponsorship?
Yes, it is.
That conversation has to startsomewhere and I'm positive about
the fact that this conversationis starting.
You see recently, more and morediscussions around sponsors and
the relationship sponsors havewith sports, and we've got to be
positive about that, becausepeople do care.
(42:37):
People rarely do care and youengage with them, engage with
sports fans, you engage withathletes, you're great with
organisations and you see thatpeople care and that's what
makes me positive.
When I have conversations withpeople and they go, this is
really great.
We need more of this.
What can we do to support this?
It's something that gives me areal optimism that change can
(42:58):
happen.
Change can happen and we needto harness that enthusiasm.
We need to harness the care andthe passion that people have
around sports and wanting tosave God, fans and the future of
sports itself in a realpositive way.
I think this sponsorship pledgethe Game Changer Sponsorship
Pledge really offers thatpositive opportunity to be
optimistic that we can bring allareas of sport together.
Ben (43:23):
That's a very strong note to end on.
I think you're hitting on somany great things there.
On Nudge Theory Change doesn'thappen until someone starts or
someone tries.
What a fantastic initiative.
Even the work you've done sinceI've known you has been pretty
spectacular in starting theseconversations.
Thank you, I wouldn't even havebelieved something like this,
even in its current form, wouldhave existed two, three years
(43:43):
ago.
That's really amazing.
Yeah, just to end, michael,thank you so much for your time.
Thank you so much for your workand keep it up.
Michael (43:51):
Wonderful.
Thanks very much for invitingme on, Ben.
It's been a pleasure.
Ben (44:02):
That was our conversation with Michael Hardy.
Just to reflect from thatconversation, I would like to
acknowledge that as fans it'shard to watch other teams making
big money signings and go on tovictory while your team
struggles, and it's verytempting to insist your team
does the same kind of deals.
But such actions areunsustainable long term, both
for sport and for the planet,and the collective action of all
(44:24):
of us means that clubs cancompete on a more financially
fair playing field and withoutthe feeling of guilt in the back
of our minds.
Just to reinforce thatstatistic that Michael gave us
from marketforcesorg, the fossilfuel projects that Standard
Chart had funded in 2021 willend up emitting 2.3 billion tons
of carbon dioxide equivalentover their lifetime, which is
(44:46):
more than five times the entireof the UK's annual emissions.
Are we to allow such recklessprofiteering to be legitimized
by sport?
If you think not, then you canfind the links to the game
changer sponsors you've pledgedin the episode description.
That's all for today.
Thank you for listening.
Please subscribe or give theshow a rating on your podcast Up
Of Choice, if you have notalready, and I will see you for
(45:08):
the next episode, a conversationon a different but very related
field.
Thanks for watching.
Until next time.
Have a nice day, bye.
Welcome back to the sustaining sport podcast.
The relationship between moneyand sport is complex.
This show has touched on manyof the issues of
over-commercialization.
Then again, if there was zeromoney involved, then athletes
couldn't compete to their fullpotential while simultaneously
paying their bills.
As we continue to make sense ofwhere between these extremes
(00:32):
would sport be best placed, Ipromise today's discussion will
not be another tirade againstthe direct oil money ownership,
although, given the scale of thetakeover moves that the Saudi
Sovereign Welfunder areattempting, it is hard not to
obsess over that.
Rather, today we are looking atthe more nuanced capital
inflows that have a few degreesof separation, for example, the
(00:53):
organizations that invest in orfund others to go out and
extract fossil fuels rather thandoing it themselves.
Additionally, there arebusinesses that continuously try
and tempt the consumer intomaking key purchases that will
cause significant harm either tothe consumer or somewhere else
along the supply chain.
Because of that separation, itis very tricky for sports fans
(01:15):
to know that the company whosename adorns the front of their
team's jersey is profiting fromsomething that they might not
agree with.
But help is on the way.
Michael Hardy has long sought toget his local team, liverpool
Football Club to drop StandardChartered as a sponsor.
He argues that StandardChartered's funding of projects
across the world that do notuphold the human rights of their
(01:36):
workers and are responsible fora massive amount of emissions
are not in line with the valuesof the team that he supports.
To try and make a difference,michael and Platform, the
organization he works for, arelaunching the Game Changer
sponsorship pledge, an excitingnew initiative that tries to
bring together everyone whocares about sport but does not
want to benefit from majorharm-causing activities.
(01:58):
They aim to put pressure onsports commercial directors to
make better choices, choicesthat better represent the clubs
and athletes' values, even ifthat means smaller money deals.
I hope you find Michael'spassion as infectious as I do.
In fact, he is so passionate.
We had a few issues with hismicrophone, which I hope you
will forgive, but I believeremaining gallant in the face of
(02:19):
a daunting task often requiresexactly that kind of passion.
So please enjoy thisconversation with Michael Hardy.
Welcome, michael, to theSustaining Sport podcast.
(02:40):
Cheers Ben, nice to be here.
So let's just begin at thebeginning, shall we?
Where did your relationshipwith sport begin, so?
Michael (02:50):
I grew up in Anfield.
As you can already probablytell, I'm from Liverpool and I'm
a big Liverpool fan.
I live in Anfield, in theshadow of the stadium.
I live very, very close to theground and it's a huge part of
people's lives, like it is upand down the country and around
the world.
Football plays a fundamentalpart in growing up in the area
(03:10):
that you live in and what itmeans to be a Liverpool fan,
especially with the culture thatyou have around, being a
specific supporter of Liverpool,a supporter of football and all
that comes along with that.
I've always tried to go to asmany games as I can at Anfield
and it's always been somethingthat I've enjoyed to do and
something that I've cared a lotabout.
Ben (03:30):
That's fantastic and, I must say, it's so great for me
to know you as a local Liverpoolfan because, in the nature of
the sporting world that wesupport, I know thousands of
Liverpool fans, basically, andvery few of them are from
Liverpool.
It is just the nature of theworld we live in.
So yeah, on that topic, how hasyour relationship with the club
changed since you were a boy?
Michael (03:53):
Well, the success of the club has definitely improved
since I was younger.
This was an achievement I hadmore recently at Champions
League and Premier Leaguesuccesses.
But my relationship more broadlycomes from embracing the
positives that being a Liverpoolfan has, but also being more
(04:14):
acutely aware of some of theproblems and some of the
criticisms that you have aroundthe relationships that the club
has with other industries andthe way they impact that they
put out in terms of differentareas as well.
So I know these being likecontroversial sponsorship deals
that you've been aware of interms of some of these things
(04:34):
and that kind of tarnishes, someof the kind of relationship
that you do have to some extentin the disappointment in your
club and the brand and thevalues of sport and the club you
support being associated withthose things.
But also the disappointment interms of the stuff that was
surrounding the European SuperLeague and things like that in
terms of the commercialisationof football, as it definitely
(04:56):
increased and not saying itdidn't exist 20 years ago, but
you've definitely seen that rampup in the way Money controls
football and controls sport morebroadly.
So it's definitely overall,it's still a great thing to be a
small fan, still a great thingto be a football fan.
Ben (05:13):
Absolutely, and I think my friends who are Newcastle
supporters will probably be abit sick of me constantly
getting a bit irritable abouttheir current ownership model.
Obviously, everyone knows aboutPSG's ownership model man City
but let's keep focusing onLiverpool, let's try and be
self-critical, because we'reboth Liverpool fans.
What is Liverpool's sponsorshipsituation?
(05:34):
Because I think just becausethe ownership may not be as
starkly quite a quiteirresponsible as some of the
others doesn't mean that it'sall sunshine and rainbows.
Michael (05:45):
No, absolutely, and Liverpool is a big culprit in
terms of negative sponsorshipdeals that it does have it's
front to.
Shared sponsor is StandardChartered Bank, which is a huge
fossil fuel financer.
There's a conversation thatpeople don't always realise
because most people in thiscountry aren't able to have a
standard Chartered Bank accounts, so a lot of people aren't
(06:07):
familiar with what StandardChartered is, let alone what
their practices are and how theyinvest their money in other
areas.
For instance, like.
One of the mind blown kind offigures for me is that in 2021
alone, standard Chartered Bankinvested in fossil fuel
expansion projects that willemit 2.3 billion tonnes of CO2
(06:27):
within those projects lifetime.
That's five times the entireemissions of the UK 3.3 billion
tonnes.
I can't even comprehend howlarge a number that is and how
much impact that that's going tohave on our planet, the people
that live on this planet and thefuture of sport, as well, as a
(06:48):
knock on effect of that too.
But the amount of money that'sbeing plowed in is a standard,
too, in terms of £46 billion hasbeen plowed into fossil fuel
expansion projects since 2016 byStandard Chartered.
So these are large sums of moneyand huge, huge emissions, which
is ultimately driving climatechange and threatening the
(07:08):
future of sport.
And it doesn't stop there.
Like the, liverpool itself hascommercial partnerships with
other industries and with otherareas as well, such as
Petro-Canada, which I think thename says on the tin, just quite
what that's about there.
It's just ludicrous, in my view, to be able to say which
Liverpool does and is asignatory of the UN Sports and
(07:29):
Climate Action Framework, basedon its pledging commitment
towards that.
What has allowed and continuesto push sponsorship deals with
these climate reckon industriesand climate reckon sponsors.
I don't think those two thingscan mute and I don't think the
representative of what thevalues of sport are.
I don't think therepresentative of what the fans
want the club to berepresentative of.
(07:49):
Yeah, we love Liverpool.
I love Liverpool as a footballclub.
I live in the shadow of itsstadium and, quite literally, I
can see the stadium from mybedroom window.
I love being a Liverpool fan.
But that doesn't absolve us ofresponsibility to criticise the
things that the club is doingwrong and the things that the
club should be doing better andworking to improve, and, I think
(08:11):
, its sustainability of itscommercial department and the
relationship it strikes withsponsors should definitely be
something that they improve onand be a focal point of the club
moving forward, becauseultimately, the research that is
out there, sport is alreadybeing drastically impacted by
the climate crisis and you won'tsee football by 2050.
(08:34):
You'll see the majority ofPremier League clubs
experiencing fixture delays dueto flooding and other weather
events.
That just won't be the same ifsport doesn't get real and clubs
don't get real and take climateaction, not just about the
sustainability of their stadiumsand operations, but the brands
that they promote.
I think always one that strikesme as being quite ludicrous is
(08:56):
the fact that Premier League hasan official engine oil sponsor.
Why is that a category ofsponsorship that we need to have
in football?
It's a nonsense.
Obviously you've got othersthat come in there, and every
club, especially every PremierLeague club, will have
relationships with the fossilfuel industry and will have
(09:19):
relationships with industriesthat are problematic.
You just look at the amount ofclubs that have gambling
sponsors as well.
It's a huge, huge problem, andthe social and climate impacts
of sponsorship deals issomething that I think sport
needs to start really takingseriously.
Ben (09:35):
What do you think standard charters are getting out of it?
Because, as you say, in the UKyou can't open a standard
chartered bank account.
So what exactly are standardcharters aims of being on
Liverpool's front of shirt?
Why are they giving them?
I think it was 50 million quida year.
Why are they giving them thatmoney?
Michael (09:51):
Well, quite simply, sponsorship works.
People will start to associatethis research out there that
suggests that people will havethat with the strong emotions
that are surrounding their teamand the sport they love.
They'll start to associatepositive emotions with the
brands that are associated withthat sponsor and with that
company.
A lot of people I speak torecognise standard charters as
(10:12):
Liverpool's share sponsor, butthey don't actually know much
about standard charters, whatits operations are more
generally and whether it's abank, especially with the large
clubs.
The international element meansthat it has a far greater reach
than what, than just the UKviewership.
In fact, with the lack ofrestrictions or less
(10:34):
restrictions on watching matchesand what not, around the globe
compared to the UK, more peoplefrom countries where standard
chartered bank does operate,we'll see more games and be more
televised games than will be inthe UK.
So every time you see Mo Salahscore a goal and standard
chartered and blazing on thefront of the shirt and it's
(10:57):
beamed across the world and thatpositive association between
Liverpool, that emotion thatyou're feeling and that brand is
there.
And these are the areas aroundthe globe where standard
chartered are invested in fossilfuel expansion projects Across
Asia, across Africa and furtherafield as well, and what it'll
(11:18):
try and do is it'll point toother things that we're working
on to say, oh, we're doing thisclimate responsibly or what not?
We're being more sustainable inthis area, but ultimately they
are still investing in fossilfuel expansion projects, whether
that have been previous yearsand things like the liquefied
natural gas pipeline inMozambique and the devastation
(11:41):
that that's caused and the thiswill continue to cause in terms
of the extraction of gas,whether it be the jazan power
plant and other projects thatare invested in.
There are doing numerousprojects that are invested in.
Ben (11:55):
Yeah, I find these particular numbers quite hard to
digest, just as a human beingon planet earth, because there's
always an argument betweenone's personal climate actions
and the sort of systemic, moreindustrial ones, and I do think
it's both.
Some people say, oh, any formof carbon footprint is a myth
and that you should just liveyour life and these oil
companies are responsible, andthat is to a degree true.
(12:17):
But at the same time there areactions we can take in our daily
lives to reduce our emissions.
But then when you put thenumbers there, it's quite
demoralizing.
I say, this summer, right, I'vegot a wedding in Italy, for
example, in October, and I'm notgoing by plane, I'm going to
get the train there.
But one obviously check myprivilege that I can get the
train there, that I can affordit because the trains aren't
cheap.
But two, you know you're savinga sort of a couple hundred
(12:39):
kilograms of CO2 by not takingthat thing.
And then you hear this numberfrom standard charted and you're
like, ah, it's frustrating.
You know, it does sort of makeyou quite angry.
And I think your point aboutMozambique was an interesting
one, where if you go to likeMaputo and you walk around, I
guarantee you.
You will see a Liverpool shirtsomewhere but one.
I'm not blaming them for that.
Of course they don't have tohave that association, but it
(13:01):
seems a weird concept that youcould almost walk around with
the branding of a company thatis negatively impacting both
planet and your country and youknow fellow citizens but also be
quite happy about it.
Michael (13:13):
No, absolutely, and all that is the design, isn't it?
The design for sponsorship insport is to create those
positive relationships and thepositive feelings that people
have towards the brand and theclubs that they love to support.
You're absolutely right.
This doesn't shouldn't mean, inmy view, that you shouldn't
support Liverpool as a result ofthese things.
I'm a massive Liverpool fan.
(13:34):
I'll continue to be a massiveLiverpool fan for my whole life
and, however, it does give aresponsibility of people who are
aware of the situation of thesponsorships to use their voice
to be able to call that out andto spread that message around
the problems that it does have.
I think that is, I think that's,the crucial thing, because
(13:54):
these companies have globalreach.
Liverpool has a global reach,it reaches people right across
the world and it has to be madeaware and has to be called out
that the practices of our mainshare sponsor are really, really
damaging.
They're awful, they're havingawful consequences in the
countries that they wereexpanding, doing the fossil fuel
expansion projects in, andthere hasn't a huge impact on
(14:16):
the climate right across acrossthe globe, and so I think it's
important that we do call outthese, these actions, especially
for making the argument againstfossil fuel banks which often
is slightly more complicated, tokind of degree of separation
that they use a sponsorship tobe able to fund the fossil fuel
industry, because it's the banksthat are providing the money
(14:38):
flashed the, the underwritingfrom insurance companies and
whatnot, to be able to carry outthe fossil fuel expansion
projects that wouldn't happenwithout their support.
So it's important to conveythat message.
Ben (14:49):
We've talked about standard charter.
We've talked about Petro-Canada.
What do you think of somethinglike Expedia, where they're not
directly responsible for theemissions?
You know the company ofExpedia's carbon footprint isn't
that high, but obviously if youwatch Expedia advert you have
Ewan McGregor or somethingtelling you to hop on a plane
which is high carbon footprint.
What do you make of that kindof sponsorship?
Michael (15:10):
I think what you find with everyone who talks about
high carbon sponsorship is thateveryone will have a slightly
different kind of like window interms of like how far the nets
should be cast in these things.
Absolutely, it's promotingother industries and directing
you to other industries that arehigh carbon related, obviously
being air travel being that mainone, and you see large examples
(15:33):
of airlines being sponsored inthe Premier League and in
support, notably the Emiratesand Etihad.
It's definitely something thatshould be discussed and it
should be something that isconsidered by commercial
departments within clubs whenthey strike in these deals.
It's comparative really, isn'tit?
In terms of the understandingthat, yes, that's problematic
and is related to the fossilfuel industry, but it's not the
(15:59):
airline itself.
So it's understanding thatdistinction and understanding
that it is a negative sponsor,like it's not a sponsor that is
going to be the best one to havein terms of if you're taking
environmental impacts seriously,but it's not the same in terms
of its direct impact as StandardChartered Bank or Emirates
Airlines or Etihad Airlines.
So there's a complexity to thatkind of discussion, but it's
(16:20):
definitely something that Ithink should be included in the
discussions that commercialdepartments are having in
relation to sustainability,because it's really important
that sustainability and thesocial impacts of sponsorships
are really at the heart of whatcommercial departments are
considering when they'restriking new deals.
And let's not make no bone tothis Sport is a lucrative
(16:42):
sponsorship opportunity forevery company around the world.
There's no shortage ofcompanies that want to use sport
to sponsor their brand.
There's no shortage.
I don't think there's probablyvery few companies that wouldn't
want their company on the frontof a Premier League shirt.
So there are otheropportunities out there for
sponsorship to bring the revenueinto clubs.
(17:03):
That doesn't have to rely onthe fossil fuel or high carbon
industries to do that.
Ben (17:09):
Yeah, you're highlighting some interesting ones.
I think the downside of the badcompanies, I guess, is that the
companies that are the mostquote unquote, exploitative or
who are taking these mining betsfossil fuel bets, whatever bets
and that's paying off.
You know, sadi Ramco is thebiggest company in the world,
most profitable company in theworld have the money to tempt in
the most of the goodwillinstitutions, like whatever
(17:33):
Liverpool or such, or even, forexample, someone like you and
McGregor, but on top of that,they have the most incentive to
do so because people have pissedoff at them because of their
dodgy action.
So it's a little bit of chickenand the egg of like.
The bad ones have the money andthe most incentive to give you
the money.
You know, I feel terrible foran organization like Forest
Green Rovers, because how dothey go around and get a
(17:56):
sustainable sponsor that'll givethem a huge amount of money?
I'm sure some will give themsome money, but they just know
that some vegan food companiesdon't actually need that much of
a you know, image cleanse.
They might need a bit of morereach and of course, there'll
still be the aim for that, butthey might not need a bit of
image cleanse.
Michael (18:13):
And you're right in saying that the ones with the
most money are the people, thecompanies that can stack up the
most offers in terms of givingclubs money for sponsorship
deals.
However, as a percentage, interms of what they give, based
on their overall investments andother things, it's incredibly
small amount of money inindividual deals.
(18:34):
And that's not to say thatincreasing the amount of
sponsorship deals would makethese sponsorships goods or
better.
It absolutely wouldn't.
But to point out the fact thatyou mentioned before, it's
believed that standard chartereddeal would live across around
50 million pounds a year.
That is a fraction, a fractionof 1% that they've come into the
fossil fuel industry since thesigning of the Parrot Accord.
(18:56):
That's an insubstantial amountof money to them for the benefit
that they get from that, theamount of people that reaches so
.
It's always important, I think,to contextualize that.
You know the way football andfinances have gone recently.
50 million pounds isn't a huge,huge sum of money in the wide
(19:17):
scope of the scheme of things.
They are like, you see, theChampions League drop Gazprom
overnight, essentially after theRussia's invasion of Ukraine,
and replaced it relativelyquickly with another sponsor,
and that wasn't difficult forthem to do, and the finances
were impacted by that, that thecost of the deal was similar.
(19:40):
I think it may have even beenslightly higher.
So they are companies out thereand you're right as well.
Between the different leaguesand the different levels of the
game at different points, thesize of those deals will vary.
Ben (19:53):
You raise a valid point there about the that they were
able to get a new sponsor thatquickly after Gazprom.
So why didn't they just get onein the first place?
Why did it take an invasion ofa sovereign nation to change
sponsorships?
And I mean, if I'm gonna takethe Nihilist view and I don't
have this view in my day-to-daylife but to take the Nihilist
view, I'm almost annoyed.
The standard charted we don'task standard charted for more.
(20:15):
Like you know, they're givingus well, we just signed
McAllister for 35 million.
They're giving us 1.7McAllisters per season,
basically to get their brand onthe front of every eyeball who
watches a game of ChampionsLeague football.
It seems well not ChampionsLeague next year.
Michael (20:32):
That's a sort of thought that bad, yeah exactly.
Ben (20:36):
Champions League winning football in the last couple of
years, Premier League winningfootball in the last couple of
years, and they only gave us 50million, Like it just seems like
Liverpool sort of had acompletely morally bankrupt
themselves for, as you say, notthat huge amount of money in the
grand scheme.
Michael (20:52):
Absolutely and obviously I don't hold the view
that increasing that to any sumof money would make that sponsor
any better in any way, shape orform.
But it does put into contextthe value that these companies
are able to get In relation tothe cost that they're paying.
Ultimately, these companiessponsor sports and sponsor
(21:12):
football because it works,because it produces more money
for them than they have put onelse.
And it's obvious why there iswhen you see, in terms of
comparatives to means, theamount of money, that the
profits that these companiesmakes, what they're giving in
sponsorship deals, are reallysmall amounts of money in
comparison to the rest of theprofits and industries You're
(21:34):
right to say like it's in thenihilist view, people are like,
oh well, they can afford to givemore.
But that is not the solution tothis.
The solution is to move awayfrom these industries and move
into less problematic industriesand industries that aren't
causing social harm to peoplewho consume sports or to the
planet as well.
Ben (21:53):
And I think, going back to the sort of airline points or
the travel points, it becomesquite difficult when it becomes
quite difficult for theseorganizations not to do it, when
I think the bigger distanceinvolved, the more money can be
leveraged.
And I'll give you exampleObviously, the most recent
Champions League final was inIstanbul and really cool
organizations like Fossil FreeFootball were saying well, hang
(22:17):
on, it's an Italian team playinga team from Manchester, why not
have the game in Paris, like itwas last year?
And it makes it sogeographically reasonable.
But of course, the entirebuildup to the final involved,
you know, liverpool's very ownStephen Gerrard in a sponsorship
campaign from Turkish Airlines,because they're not hosting the
final, because the owners ofTurkish Airlines want to watch
(22:38):
football, even though they maydo.
They're hosting the final therebecause they can use that event
and the eyeballs to incentivizepeople to travel to these
places.
And then I think we get there'sa knowing thing where they kind
of want to offset the guilt ofthe travel onto the end consumer
.
And me, being an end consumerin this case, then feels the
(22:58):
guilt because, you know, thensuddenly my friend, because they
watched the Champions Leaguefinals, says, oh, I want to do
my destination wedding inIstanbul.
That's great, that's cool.
But then I'm now that goessitting at home turning down my
friend's wedding because I can'tget to Istanbul without hopping
on a plane.
So you know they almost createthe problem and then say to the
consumer you solve it if youcare about sustainability.
(23:19):
So it's a really fierce cycle,of which football and you know
sport in general is tied up in.
Michael (23:25):
Yeah, you're absolutely right, and what you've just
described there is literally thereason why they want to sponsor
sports.
Why these industries want tosponsor sports gets the positive
relationship.
It creates revenue for them.
To do so creates opportunitiesthat they can tap into to make
themselves more money and maketheir businesses even more
profitable.
Because these aren't industries, by the way, these aren't
(23:47):
companies that are struggling toget money.
These aren't companies that arestruggling to get by.
They want to increase theirprofit margins even more so in a
way that is completelyun-tustainable within the planet
, as it is currently in theclimate crisis that we face, and
one of the impacts of theclimate crisis is that, within
the next few decades, sport willbe un-recognisable.
(24:09):
You see how frequently the sportencounters are disrupted now,
in terms of sport and weatherinstances around the world
flooding, extreme heat.
You've seen today some of thereports.
I think there was an article inReuters talking about the
Mexican national games, wherethese teams that have matches
are being canceled.
(24:29):
Teams have walked off the pitch, athletes have been
hospitalized due to extreme heatand the extreme weather there.
You've seen grand prix floodedoff.
You've seen football matchesaround the world cancels for
weather events, and this is onlygoing to get worse, is the
climate crisis gripped harder,the devastation in terms of that
is going to happen to theplanet is going to worsen and
(24:51):
the impact that it'll have onfans, athletes and the sport and
calendar is going to be evenlarger.
And this is why it's now is thetime as the climate crisis
grips harder.
Now is really the time forgoverning bodies, for sports
teams and sports organisationsto really serious the issues of
sustainability and includesponsorship deals in them,
(25:14):
because it's really importantthat they do the things they can
to make their stadiums and maketheir operations as sustainable
as possible, but to ignore thefact that they're promoting
hugely, hugely pollutingindustries and fossil fuel banks
and fossil fuel companies iscompletely counter the trying to
(25:34):
make by making their stadiumsand their operations more
sustainable.
Like you look around at some ofthe most egregious examples of
fossil fuel sponsorship in worldfootball and you look at the
African corporations which aresponsored by Total, which is
just completely outrageous to beable to do that, and they still
use their brand to sponsorsports right across the world
(25:58):
and they're having a devastating.
Total's operations are havingthis devastating impact on the
planet, the people all over theworld and the communities where
they're having their fossil fuelexpansion projects, and for
sports to kind of tend to blindeye to that is unsustainable,
it's completely ridiculous andit's immoral.
And sports need to look thosearguments right in the face and
(26:21):
resolve them and move to severthe relationships that they have
with these industries, becausesports should be used as a
vehicle for good and not tothreaten the future of sport
itself and have a devastatingimpact on people on planet.
Ben (26:37):
I think the Africa one is a super complex situation where,
from particularly a macroperspective, it's hard to say
that Africa doesn't deservemoney being put in, you know.
So, in theory, if those Totalinvestments would be trickling
down through the system andhelping people in underdeveloped
regions, et cetera, et cetera,you could maybe make the
(26:58):
argument.
But one I'm not always sure ifthat is the case and it's very
hard to verify that that's thecase and two, it does set up
this weird incentive that Ithink a lot of billionaires and
big companies run into where italmost seems to suit you the
best, to do something wrong, dosomething bad, do something that
exploits either other humanbeings or the environment,
(27:19):
leverage a huge amount of moneyfrom that or gain a huge amount
of money from that.
Then take some of that moneyand put it to something like a
sports tournament or a rewildingproject or anything like that,
and say look at the great thingwe're doing, which you can't.
Then say that's not a greatthing you're doing.
You know I can't specificallysay Total's money into African
football is a bad thing, but ofcourse, what are they leveraging
(27:42):
back?
They're leveraging a falsereputation.
We're saying that Total is aquote, unquote.
Good company and it neverbalances out.
They're never putting in enoughmoney into Africa.
Then they're taking out ofAfrica in the form of fossil
fuel expansion and humanexploitation.
So it's a really frustratingthing that you know.
If you go on the internetyou'll see.
You won't believe what thisperson has done good with their
(28:03):
money.
But where do they get the money?
And yeah, obviously,particularly in the cases of
companies, they're facelessorganizations.
There's no individual that ismasterminding this, so it's
almost impossible to say thatthey're who's doing the wrong
thing.
But it's very interesting.
Michael (28:17):
But what you've described there quite eloquently
is what greenwashing andsportswashing is, and they use
this to launder the reputationsand to promote a positive image
for themselves, whilst doingthings that are completely
immoral and morally bankrupt anddamaging to people and planning
.
I understand you're saying like,obviously African football
(28:39):
deserves investments and whatnot.
That is not going to that I'mmaking.
But the investments thatthey're getting from a fossil
fuel company, directly from afossil fuel company, threatens
the future of football andthreatens the planet and
threatens the livelihoods andthe communities of people right
across the world and within thecommunities within Africa with
(29:01):
some of the fossil fuelexpansion projects that they're
directly involved with there.
So that's why they do itthrough greenwashing and
sportswashing to say, oh, we'veused this money to do this great
project or that great project.
But when you kind of put thatinto perspective and turn to
their operations and the impactthat they're more broadly having
, they're far less significantthan the negative impact that
(29:23):
they're having.
So I understand the argumentthat the football needs
investment and whatnot, or itshould not be reliant and should
not be taking money from theindustries that are threatening
the future of sport.
Ben (29:37):
I think also it's so difficult when the distances and
the disconnect you have fromthese companies Like if I was to
come up with some kind of realworld example if we were in the
neighborhood and someone had,like, a lemonade stand and they
had cut costs on their lemonadeproduction by putting rotten
lemonade in the lemonade butmaking a profit on doing so, and
(29:57):
then reinvested that profitinto, like a local swimming pool
, but we all got sick from thelemons.
We wouldn't say, oh, well, donefor building a swimming pool.
Thank you very much.
How the hell did you just dothat?
But because these companies aremiles away, we don't necessarily
directly see every day theactions on the ground and all
this kind of stuff, particularlyfor people in these situations
in Africa, that they only maybesee in the short term.
(30:21):
Oh, but a money coming in fromtotal, that's fine, cool, Great.
But of course, if you take thesystems perspective or the
broads perspective, like this isnot sustainable exactly as you
phrase.
But now let's talk about yourwork, because obviously all my
listeners will hear the passionthat you talk about, the stuff
and the details that you have.
How have you turned all of yourpassion and motivation and
(30:43):
fixing the system into a career?
Michael (30:47):
So I began where I first met you, ben, a few years
back, working for anorganization called Ploughful,
and I was a freelancer at thetime and I was involved with a
few others in running a campaigncalled Fossil Free LFC and that
was directly as thisconversation started with about
the relationship betweenLiverpool Football Club and
(31:08):
Standard Chartered Bank, andthrough that way I got involved
with discussions with fans.
I think, within this whole kindof sustainability and campaign
and then trying to change this,the way football uses
sponsorship and thesustainability is both involving
fans in that discussion andpart of that campaign is crucial
.
One of the things thatregularly came up during
(31:30):
discussions with fans is oncethey conveyed the message of the
problems around StandardChartered and they would broadly
accept that Standard Charteredwere not a good company to
sponsor Liverpool was the factthat there was an understanding
that there were other areas ofsponsorship that are negative,
and I now work for platform andwe're working on the campaign
(31:53):
and the sponsorship pledge thatdrives together those three
areas in terms of the clubs,fans and athletes to bring those
people together to campaignabout what we're calling harmful
sponsorship, and those harmfulsponsorship are present that
we're looking at in terms of thecampaigns that exist the High
Carbon, which is what I'vediscussed here quite in depth
with yourself today, andgambling companies and the
(32:18):
alcohol industry as well.
All of those have gotestablished campaigns in
different areas and what not?
Against those types ofsponsorship.
Because what I see this is apledge to bring those
stakeholders for sport, butthat's broadly what they are.
The clubs, the fans, theathletes bring those people
together to break what Idescribe as the cycle of harmful
(32:39):
sponsorship, how we switchbetween these harmful sponsors.
Like you go back, and tobaccosponsorship was the only
sponsorship in town in sportsand practically anything at one
stage.
If it wasn't sponsored byTobacco, then it wasn't
happening at one point, and nowthat became a thing of the past.
And alcohol industries,gambling industries, high carbon
(33:01):
industries came into that spacewithin sport, within football,
and they chop and change betweenthose industries.
What this pledge aims to do isto bring together all those
groups of people that I've justdescribed to break that cycle,
to say our sport, our clubs, ourteams that we love to support
(33:21):
don't need to be reliant onmoney from these industries.
It causes harm to fans and itthreatens the future of the game
.
So we need to be really engagedin those three areas, get as
many mobilised behind the pledgethat we've referred to as the
game changer sponsorship pledge,because that's what we're
really ultimately hoping to do.
We're hoping to change the game.
(33:42):
It's hoping that this will be agame changer in the way that we
review sports sponsorshipmoving forward.
We've spoke a lot about football, but this is not narrowly
minded through trouble.
This is a sports sponsorshippledge.
So we want to engage with allsports, we want to engage with
(34:04):
all sporting organisations andwe want to go with those people
on a journey from thatacceptance to commitment of not
extending deals, not renewingdeals, not signing deals with
these industries and that's whatI hope this really does as an
opportunity to do, but reallypositively for a sport that can
(34:24):
continue to thrive.
We've talked about all thenegatives of these relationships
that exist, but it doesn't haveto be that way.
Our engagements within thisprocess and our campaign and our
voices do matter because, asyou've heard the phrase all the
time and I think sports fans arekey to this, because you'll
hear it in football all the timeand across all the sports Sport
(34:45):
without fans is nothing.
So the voice of fans, the voiceof athletes, is really, really
important within this inbringing these areas together
and really putting thesediscussions on the agenda so
that the powers that be, theorganisations, the government
bodies that make these decisions, the clubs and the
organisations, can't ignore it.
They can't ignore it.
(35:06):
We have to put it on the agendaand they have to take us
seriously.
We've got to come together andcreate the environment where
they can't ignore us, where theyhave to take us seriously,
where they have to start to takeaction, because at some point
that we know in terms of highcarbon frontiers, they must know
that at some point that it willbe unignorable.
(35:28):
And what we're asking them todo is to get on board early.
I say early, get on boardearlier, before any legislative
change is going to come in andbe part of the change that we
can actually see in sports, totry and protect its future and
protect its fans and supportersand the athletes that compete in
it.
Ben (35:47):
Yeah, I think there's definitely a first mover
advantage here, and it seemsridiculous that we have to say
the phrase first mover when itcomes to climate in 2023.
But if you can get on therecord now and say that this
stuff's got to change from, asyou say, industry stakeholder
perspective, it's a hugeadvantage.
Because the point that oncefootball stadiums are literally
regularly under water, you'renot going to get any brownie
(36:10):
points, quote unquote by saying,oh yeah, we need to do
something about climate.
It has to be now or probably 10years ago, but here we are now.
And I also think one of thestruggles when it comes to this
kind of changes communication,coordination I think you'll
often find a couple ofstakeholders are sort of
separated, but they actuallythink in the same way.
So your, your idea here ofbringing people together, coming
(36:31):
up with some kind of cohesivenext step, and you guys
providing the pun intendedplatform for that next step, is
exceptionally powerful.
I'd also say that, first of all, football without without
devokary is nothing.
That's one thing we mustremember.
But exactly that you know, assoon as the, the, the fans, get
involved at a quite asubstantive level, then exactly,
(36:53):
football without fans isnothing and, as you say, that
applies to all sports, not justfootball.
And this is, I think, a reallyexciting next step.
What?
What's the actual process forclubs to get involved?
You know, if there's a clublistening to this right now,
what would you said them interms of how they can join this,
this action?
Michael (37:11):
So we'll hope to have, by the time this goes out we
hope to that this will havelaunched as a pledge and and
it'll be hosted, and this workis being will be hosted in
partnership with both platformand bad reticent and the pledge
will be hosted on both of thosewebsites and the contact
information will be included onthose websites.
And any organization that wantsto get involved and wants to
(37:34):
sign up, wants to have aconversation, wants to discuss
this more, will be able to getin contact with myself and we
can.
We can discuss that further.
See, the more people thatpledge support and sign up for,
the better what we want to havesessions with people to.
We understand that that if it'sclubs that want to go on board,
that they'll probably be ajourney and these are the that
(37:56):
those clubs need to go on,because I don't think these are
and I don't can't think of aclub off the top of my head that
doesn't have a relationshipwith at least one of these
industries covered in thesponsorship pledge.
So there will be a journey thatsome of these sports teams and
organizations will need to go on.
So that starts with therecognition that these
sponsorship, sponsorship fromthese industries, is harmful and
(38:16):
we need to move away from themto safeguard sport and to
safeguard our supporters and tosafeguard society more broadly.
And I think that's that's,that's the starting point to get
in touch once once, once we'relaunched which should be when
this goes out and having contact.
If you're interested inspeaking more, if you want, if
you've got an organization, ifyou've got a link to an
(38:38):
organization that you thinkcould be, would be keen to
discuss this further, then I'mavailable and always open to
discussion and engaging andtrying to make positive change
happen.
Ben (38:49):
How would you say this pledge that you're putting
forward differs from, likesports for climate action
framework, which so manyorganizations have put their
hands up and said, oh, yes, yesto this, but then it didn't seem
to go one step beyond?
How are you guys going toensure that, once people have
bought you know, bought into thethe principle that they take
those next steps?
Michael (39:09):
And so I think the terms of the commitments are
within our pledge, specificallyaround sponsorship or calling
for a move in the way from thoseareas of sponsorship.
So these are much more tangiblerecourse, to kind of point out a
form of hypocrisy.
So if someone signs up to saywe've committed to phasing out
these industries, or whateverstage we've phased out this
(39:32):
industry that we've described inthis with a view to phasing out
more, you can tangibly seethrough their commercial
relationship and theirsponsorship deals whether they
are doing that or not.
We don't want this to be takenas the opportunity to be a
greenwashing exercise for clubsto go We've signed this, we've
done great things, kind ofthings.
We definitely want to make surethat these, like the commitment
(39:53):
to doing this, is a commitmentto actually carrying out what
they, what they say they'regoing to do.
And I think, with it beingabout sponsorship and it
discusses sponsorship in a waythat the framework doesn't and
an existence of harm, and Ithink for clubs to step up and
take that responsibility willshow that they're ahead of the
well, will be ahead of the curveof most football and sporting
(40:15):
clubs out there that haven't yetor won't want to accept the
harm that these industries do.
Ben (40:23):
That's a really smart way of doing it.
I think a lot of the goods thatcomes in sport is actually
quite intangible, and then Ithink some sports clubs may like
to pretend that some of the badstuff is also intangible.
As you say, something like asponsorship thing is very black
and white on paper.
It's very tangible.
So the actions are there, likeon the 1st of July or wherever,
baby, you have this sponsor,where you at 1st of July 2024,
(40:47):
where you in the 1st of July2025.
If you still got the sponsors,you're still doing the wrong
thing.
So that's that's quite exciting, I think.
Just to sort of end thisconversation, I always like to
try and find some, somepositivity on this and I think
your passion is really speakingthrough here.
But how optimistic are youabout?
You know won the success ofthis campaign.
But on top of that, just in thechange of the industry, do you
(41:08):
believe that the industry canchange in a meaningful and
responsible way?
Michael (41:13):
Well, I'm positive about the fact that I want to
reach as many people as I canwith this discussion.
Do I think that in theimmediate term, we're going to
see the largest clubs around theworld sign up to this?
No, I don't.
But do I think that we cancreate positive change by
engaging with fans and engagingwith athletes and engaging with
the clubs at different levels ofthe game?
We start putting this as adiscussion point and start
(41:34):
putting this on the agenda.
We have these discussionsbecause we need to make these,
these arguments and put them onthe agenda.
They need to be in a positionwhere they can't be ignored, and
they will be ignored unless,unless we shout loud enough,
unless we start making actionsand doing things that mean they
can't ignore us in this way.
And this is a positive way ofdoing this in terms of getting
(41:55):
people on board and engagingwith clubs and try and get them
on this journey with us to beahead of the curve of what a lot
of sports clubs are.
I do think these are a lot ofpositivity to have.
I think these lots of optionsas I've set out earlier for
clubs to look elsewhere forsponsorship deals and not be
reliant on these industries?
Do I think this is a huge, ahuge task?
(42:15):
Absolutely Do.
I think it's going to be a longterm thing to try and get to
the point where we need to be inrelation to sports and
sponsorship?
Yes, it is.
That conversation has to startsomewhere and I'm positive about
the fact that this conversationis starting.
You see recently, more and morediscussions around sponsors and
the relationship sponsors havewith sports, and we've got to be
positive about that, becausepeople do care.
(42:37):
People rarely do care and youengage with them, engage with
sports fans, you engage withathletes, you're great with
organisations and you see thatpeople care and that's what
makes me positive.
When I have conversations withpeople and they go, this is
really great.
We need more of this.
What can we do to support this?
It's something that gives me areal optimism that change can
(42:58):
happen.
Change can happen and we needto harness that enthusiasm.
We need to harness the care andthe passion that people have
around sports and wanting tosave God, fans and the future of
sports itself in a realpositive way.
I think this sponsorship pledgethe Game Changer Sponsorship
Pledge really offers thatpositive opportunity to be
optimistic that we can bring allareas of sport together.
Ben (43:23):
That's a very strong note to end on.
I think you're hitting on somany great things there.
On Nudge Theory Change doesn'thappen until someone starts or
someone tries.
What a fantastic initiative.
Even the work you've done sinceI've known you has been pretty
spectacular in starting theseconversations.
Thank you, I wouldn't even havebelieved something like this,
even in its current form, wouldhave existed two, three years
(43:43):
ago.
That's really amazing.
Yeah, just to end, michael,thank you so much for your time.
Thank you so much for your workand keep it up.
Michael (43:51):
Wonderful.
Thanks very much for invitingme on, Ben.
It's been a pleasure.
Ben (44:02):
That was our conversation with Michael Hardy.
Just to reflect from thatconversation, I would like to
acknowledge that as fans it'shard to watch other teams making
big money signings and go on tovictory while your team
struggles, and it's verytempting to insist your team
does the same kind of deals.
But such actions areunsustainable long term, both
for sport and for the planet,and the collective action of all
(44:24):
of us means that clubs cancompete on a more financially
fair playing field and withoutthe feeling of guilt in the back
of our minds.
Just to reinforce thatstatistic that Michael gave us
from marketforcesorg, the fossilfuel projects that Standard
Chart had funded in 2021 willend up emitting 2.3 billion tons
of carbon dioxide equivalentover their lifetime, which is
(44:46):
more than five times the entireof the UK's annual emissions.
Are we to allow such recklessprofiteering to be legitimized
by sport?
If you think not, then you canfind the links to the game
changer sponsors you've pledgedin the episode description.
That's all for today.
Thank you for listening.
Please subscribe or give theshow a rating on your podcast Up
Of Choice, if you have notalready, and I will see you for
(45:08):
the next episode, a conversationon a different but very related
field.
Thanks for watching.
Until next time.
Have a nice day, bye.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.