Naming rights an ‘unpulled lever’ for the arts sector

Theatres should be offering venue naming rights in exchange for corporate sponsorship, a senior figure in the sector has said.

Speaking at The Stage’s Future of Theatre conference on 30 April, arts consultant Martin Prendergast said that corporate naming rights for venues are an untapped opportunity for the arts sector to raise financing that’s more on a par with sports.

“I think it is the way that the industry is going to go. Because [for] people that run arts institutions, how many levers are left to pull?” said Prendergast.

“And you might not have thought about naming rights in the past. There might have been some ickiness about that, perhaps. But I think now, with the right partner who believes in the mission, there is potentially a big lever for arts institutions to pull.”

Aviva or Lego?

Citing Avivia studios in Manchester, he said arts organisations should look to forming partnerships with “a really suitable, lovely brand, like an Aviva or Lego” that aligns “completely” with their mission.

“You have this very deep relationship that is driven by the commercial needs of the sponsor, but has mission and community absolutely at its heart.

“So with Aviva studios. Yes, it’s called Aviva studios, and that gives them the marketing benefits that make it worth £35m.

As part of a wider conversation on new ideas for financing theatre, Prendergast was asked about the issues arts organisations face when the public perception of a corporate sponsor’s values is called into question, as with the partnership between Sadler’s Wells and Barclays Bank, which has prompted protests at the venue.

Suggesting that government needs to play a role in creating the conditions in which sponsorship of the arts can thrive, Prendergast said there needs to be “nuance and sophistication and maturity in the discussion about the sponsorship protests”, praising Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy for “pushing back against the protests in a in a sensitive but firm way”.

“I think the government has a role in continuing that strategy of reminding people what the corporate sponsorship of the arts delivers,” he said.

“It gets young kids subsidised tickets or free tickets to come to the theatre. It gives after school clubs, it opens up the whole world of the performing arts as a career. And that’s what’s at risk.”

Public investment

Discussing the upcoming review of Arts Council England, fellow panellist Chris Stafford, chief executive of Curve, stressed that despite a difficult financial landscape, he felt the sector needed to collectively ask for more money from the government.

“I don’t think that’s going to be coming, but I don’t think we should just rely on going, let’s be quiet. It’s not going to come. I think we still have to be making the case out there and being vocal about why we need more money,” he said.

“I really plead we get rid of this term subsidy, because to the people that are not part of the world, they see it as a handout. And actually, we make great business and social sense.”

Pointing to the success of the sector in collectively lobbying for the higher rate of Theatre Tax Relief to be retained at 40%, Mark Twum-Ampofo, head of theatre at accountants Moore Kingston Smith noted: “Had that [rate] dropped down to 20 and 25% [as planned] a couple of weeks ago, that would have been a very cold, cold wind through the sector.

“Costs do continue to go up. While inflation might be low now, we’ve got the higher rates for the last couple of years baked in. National Insurance has gone up, utilities have gone up, but so far, you know, the wheels have stayed on.

“And I would say that is mainly [due to] the tax credit. There are lots of shows that I work on that actually only recoup thanks to the tax credit. So I think we need to fight very, very hard to retain that. And then it’s [a case of] how can we keep making that argument about the wider benefits of theatre?”