The Commercial Table

Building a high-trust newsletter for commercial leaders in sport and entertainment.

Each week, I answer one tactical question CCOs and commercial teams face. Across revenue, sponsorships, partner strategy, growth and internal alignment.

The newsletter delivers tangible tools like onboarding checklists, messaging frameworks, internal pitch templates, and comms teardowns. Based on real conversations with CCOs, brand leads, and operators in the field.

This is built for the people doing the work behind the deals.

Founder

Track Limits

Creative Director

Creative Consultant

Mac Clark Racing 

Orbit Echelon Inc

At Orbit Echelon Inc., we specialise in co-writing for sponsors and sports companies.

EarthOne

Head of Content

Photographer

Sport Signage

Digital Marketing Manager

Racing Edge

Marketing Manager

Pfaff Automotive Partners

Brand Marketing Specialist

Link Media KW

I ghostwrite Educational Email Courses for motorsport brands so they can turn fans into fanatics | Creative Director & photographer

I am the founder of The Commercial Table, where I talk about the commercial world of sports and entertainment. 

We also help commercial executives turn partnerships into revenue through the newsletter and consulting practice.
​
My career is far from traditional, almost paying catch-up at times - I spent 10 years as a photographer before transitioning to writing, lived across three countries (with more airport mishaps than I care to count), and somehow found my way into the niche world of motorsport marketing without ever fully stepping into the corporate world.
​
My approach to LinkedIn mirrors largely my personality - more listening than speaking, trying to be more authentic than polished. My theory is If you treat LinkedIn like Twitter in 2021, you'll win. I am obsessed with how comedians and TV shows write, have dreams of working on a screenplay someday, and can talk your ear off about tennis.

I have coached 30+ clients globally, earned LinkedIn Top Voice recognition, and built my business by following curiosity and scratching my own itches - and putting ideas into action.

I asked The IRONMAN Group's Global Partnerships Manager how many companies they research before making a single outreach.

His answer: 80-90 per category.

Then I asked how long their partnership discussions typically take.

6-12 months.

Most sports properties would call this inefficient.

Manuel BASSIERE calls it "the only way that works."

I spent the last week trying to understand why IRONMAN's partnership approach is the complete opposite of what everyone else does in sports marketing.

What IRONMAN does:
→ Deep research on 80-90 brands per category 
→ Custom activation concepts before first contact 
→ 6-12 month consulting-style conversations 
→ Measure success by conversation quality

The part that fascinated me:

Manuel doesn't even start with brands.

He starts with athlete surveys.

2025 survey response rate: 25-35% (most sports properties get 5-8%)

The survey showed athletes wanted skincare solutions for training and recovery.

So Manuel didn't search "sports sponsors."

He searched "premium skincare brands that align with endurance lifestyle."

Then he approached Bulldog with: "Our athletes are requesting these specific products. We've identified three integration opportunities. Here's what we're thinking."

Not: "Would you like to sponsor IRONMAN?"

But: "We have a problem our athletes need solved. Can you solve it?"


IRONMAN approach: 

→ Target narrow list (80-90 brands) 
→ Convert 5-8% (4-7 deals) 


Fewer conversations. Higher value. Better fit.

What I couldn't figure out from public information:

How does Manuel actually identify those 80-90 brands?

What's his exact research process before outreach?

How does he structure the first conversation to position it as consulting vs. sales?

What activation frameworks does he use for different partner categories?

So I asked him.

The full conversation is in this week's newsletter:

→ His exact brand mapping methodology 
→ The outreach templates that get 40%+ response rates
→ How he structures 3-tier partnership packages 
→ Why he focuses on process metrics, not just sales outcomes 
→ The reality check: what works for IRONMAN vs. smaller properties

Manuel was refreshingly honest: "My life is easier because I work for IRONMAN. But the methodology works at any scale if you're willing to do the actual work."

The actual work = systematic audience research + value-first outreach.

Most properties skip step one and wonder why step two doesn't work.

Full breakdown of that playbook in today's newsletter.

Link in comments 👇

Nirupam Singh

Helping you unlock commercial growth in motorsport | Founder @ The Commercial Table

Mercedes F1 grew revenue by 16% last year to £636 million.

I was reading their Companies House filing this week, trying to figure out how.

And I kept coming back to this one line:

"Over 60% of income from commercial revenues - sponsorship and licensing."

Sponsorship, sure. That makes sense. But licensing?

I started digging.

Turns out there's a difference I'd never thought deeply enough about:

Sponsorship = Petronas pays Mercedes to stick their logo on the car

Licensing = EA Sports pays Mercedes to put Mercedes cars in their video game

One is selling space for someone else's brand. The other is renting out your own brand.

And when I looked at what Mercedes is actually doing with this:

→ Adidas pays them eight figures a year to make Mercedes F1 clothing 

→ IWC has been their watch partner for 12 years (they just made a third team watch in January) 

→ LEGO made a £190 Mercedes F1 model - 1,642 pieces → EA Sports uses Mercedes in every F1 game 

→ These die-cast model companies (Minichamps, Spark, Bburago) all pay to make tiny Mercedes cars 

→ Puma had a deal worth £6M+ annually before Adidas took over

The basic deal structure seems to be:

"You want to make stuff with our name on it? Pay us 8-12% of sales."

Or they just negotiate a flat fee worth millions.

What's interesting about this vs sponsorship:

You can only fit so many logos on a car. There's a physical limit

But with licensing, you can license to 50 companies at once if you want.

They're all paying. None of them compete with each other.

And they each reach completely different people:

→ Video games reach people who don't even watch F1. 
→ LEGO reaches families on a Sunday afternoon. 
→ Watches reach the luxury market. 
→ Apparel reaches streetwear people.

Same brand but just in totally different contexts.

That "over 60% from sponsorship and licensing" they mentioned?

That's £380M+ combined.

The filing doesn't break down how much is sponsorship vs how much is licensing.

So sponsorship is just one part of how these teams make money.

And licensing is clearly another big piece.

And there's a whole ecosystem behind making this work:

→ The team principals and drivers building the brand presence. 
→ The content and comms teams creating the stories. 
→ The commercial team structuring these deals.

All of it feeds into making the brand valuable enough that companies want to license it.

Which makes me curious:

What other revenue streams do teams actually have?

Beyond sponsorship and licensing.

Because if Mercedes is pulling £636M in total revenue, and £380M+ is just from sponsorship and licensing combined...

Hospitality? 
Prize money from F1?
Merchandise they sell directly? 

For more like this, subscribe to the The Commercial Table - Link in the comments

Smartsheet sponsored McLaren's F1 car, then removed its logo.

Instead of slapping their name on the sidepod like every other tech company, they gave that space to nonprofits.

The execution involved 100 stakeholders across a dozen workstreams. 15-week approval chains. Something called "pass-through rights" that sounds like Harry Potter wizard law.

Their philosophy was simple: spend as much on activation as on the sponsorship itself, or don't bother.

Because renting the space without doing anything with it is like buying a Ferrari to sit in traffic.

→  6.3 million video views. 
→  29.3 million social impressions. 
→ Coverage in Sky Sports and Financial Times.

And something rarer than a team boss admitting fault: Zak Brown publicly praising a sponsor.

It's about finding the story that resonates with people.

Then doing the work to make it real.

Full case study with exclusive interviews and internal docs in this week's Commercial Table newsletter. Link in the comments.

Helping commercial leaders turn sport partnerships into revenue | Founder @ The Commercial Table

While most sports properties chase F1-level partnerships with generic pitches, IRONMAN's team does the exact opposite. 

→ They survey their athletes (25-35% response rates)
→ Identify specific needs like skincare solutions
→ Then approach brands like Bulldog with ready-made activation concepts. 

Not "can we jump on a call?" but "here are three integration opportunities based on athlete feedback." 

I spent time with Manuel BASSIERE, their Global Partnerships Manager, understanding how they've systematised premium partnerships over 47 years. 

70% of their athletes are high-income earners spending €10,000+ annually on triathlon. Their partnerships team maps 80-90 companies per category before making a single outreach. 

The methodology that generates 6-12 month partnership discussions drops on Tuesday. 

The Commercial Table - subscribe in comments 👇

Carlos Sainz had options.

Red Bull. Audi. Other teams higher up the grid.

In July 2024, he signed with Williams.

The team in 9th place.

That decision was worth more to Williams' commercial operation than any sponsorship deck they could create.

Because it answered the only question partners actually care about:

"Is this transformation real, or are you just selling me a story?"

When a race winner chooses you over teams finishing ahead of you, that's external validation you can't manufacture.

Williams used that validation to grow revenue by £52.8 million in a season where they:

1. Finished two places worse in the championship
2. Crashed more than any other team
3. Burned cash and needed shareholder support

Then in January 2025, Atlassian became title partner in the biggest deal in Williams' 48-year history.

I've spent the last week mapping exactly how they did it.

And the answer isn't what most commercial teams expect.

It wasn't better results. It wasn't a bigger budget. It wasn't flashier activation ideas.

It was getting three specific elements aligned that most properties completely miss.

Today’s newsletter breaks it down:

→ The £52.8M revenue growth story (while finishing worse) 
→ Why James Vowles was the only person who could sell this transformation → The Message-Medium-Messenger framework that turns rebuilding into revenue 
→ How to make your transformation commercially valuable before results show up

If you're trying to figure out how to attract partners when your performance isn't there yet, this is the case study that shows you exactly how it's done.

Drops today morning: https://lnkd.in/gCqNhzqU

What's one thing you think Williams is doing that other teams should copy?

Photo by Williams Racing IG account

Pierre Gasly wears shoes from a brand that spent £200 to get his attention.

Not £200,000. Just £200.

I got curious how Alexander Witty built driver partnerships for Compound Footwear without a sponsorship budget.

Alex brought products and nice packaging to Silverstone hoping Pierre Gasly and Naomi Schiff would be there.

They were.

No contract or activation requirements.

Just: "Here's the product. If you like it, wear it."

Pierre wears it frequently. So does Naomi and Alex Albon.

Alex's take: "You're getting it almost from a very just, I love the product. I'm just going to wear it naturally, which is sometimes even above just a regular partnership."

The F1-75 proximity play:

February 2025: F1-75 event at O2 Arena.

Alex rented space 100 yards away. Put an Ayrton Senna Tolman F1 car out front (his father worked with Senna in the early 80s).

Just proximity to the show

Result: ~1,000 people attended. 45 pre-orders that day.

Network from Brighton University became his production team.

What I'm trying to understand:

→ Can this scale beyond one person gifting products?

→ Does proximity marketing work without family connections for F1 car access?

→ How sustainable is creative-work-for-access when you need consistent output?

I mapped out Alex's journey from £500 grant to first 100 customers, including why his failed Kickstarter saved the business.

Full investigation in this week's newsletter: From University Project to First 100 Customers.

Subscribe to The Commercial Table - link in comments.

The Isle of Man TT has been running since 1907.

118 years of spectators standing inches from bikes passing at 200+ mph.

I got curious how the TT sells sponsorship when its main attraction is something most brands actively avoid: unfiltered danger.

What makes the TT different:

Fans sit on stone walls next to the track.

Riders navigate 37.73 miles of public roads with houses, trees, and kerbs as the only margins.

All motorsport has edge. The TT just refuses to sand it down.

Their sponsorship pitch:

"Any form of association with the TT is only for brands and companies that are prepared to take risks."

They're selling prestige through association with the most uncompromising race in the world.

The commercial setup:

→ TT+ (OTT platform) streams globally year-round 
→ Category-exclusive partnerships (no competing brands) 
→ Isle of Man government backs it as tourism strategy 
→ Economic impact: £32M annually over two weeks

Government backing lets them be selective about sponsors.

They don't need to take every deal offered.

What surprised me:

Most brands want safety, controlled environments, predictable outcomes.

The TT offers the opposite and charges premium rates for it.

Brands sponsoring the TT are making a specific bet: they want association with authenticity and tradition, not sanitized motorsport.

The fan experience:

You can stand at Ballaugh Bridge and watch bikes get airborne 10 feet away.

You can walk the course between sessions.

That proximity is irreplaceable.

What the TT proves:

Commercial professionalization (OTT platforms, data analytics, global reach) can coexist with traditional racing formats.

Some sponsors pay premium rates specifically because you haven't sanitized the product.

Category-exclusive deals create scarcity and higher value per partner.

Want more deep dives into how motorsport properties actually work commercially?

Subscribe to The Commercial Table - link in comments.

Would you rather watch racing where you're separated by barriers, or racing where you're standing next to the track at 200mph?

Photo from Isle of Man TT Instagram account

Well, this is awkward.

Our first Grand Prix collaboration just pulled 1.1 million views and 26k interactions for a quick look into the Smartsheet-McLaren partnership.

The numbers:

→ 1.1 million views
→ 26,272 interactions
→ 24k likes
→ 1.7k saves
→ 882 sends

Sounds brilliant, right. But the sentiment was pretty rough. Loads of negative comments. People weren't exactly thrilled with what we put out there.

Which is fascinating, actually. Because the engagement numbers suggest people were interested enough to stop scrolling and react. They just didn't like what they saw when they did.

I don't think we got it wrong - it's that we need to consider the balance of content we're putting on there. 

Perhaps heavy business breakdowns are effective, but not as the sole approach. Maybe the audience wants a mix - some commercial insights, some pure racing content. 

Either way, it's a timely reminder that engagement is engagement, but we need to assess what kind of experience we're creating for people who follow motorsport content.

Something to figure out as we go.

Press '𝗩𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝘆 𝘄𝗲𝗯𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗲' under my name ☝️ to join.

Smartsheet paid $1M to REMOVE their logo from a McLaren F1 car.

The results:

→ 6.3 million video views (2x target)
→ 29.3 million social impressions
→ Won ADDY Best in Show + 5 Gold awards
→ McLaren CEO called it "leading edge for Formula 1"

How do you manage 100 stakeholders across 12 workstreams to pull this off?

This case study is based on exclusive interviews and documentation from the SponsorX campaign. 

Tomorrow's newsletter breaks down the complete SponsorX strategy - from the 15-week approval process to the stakeholder management system that made it work.

Exclusive internal breakdown, never published before. 

Join 1000+ subscribers at The Commercial Table, getting it here:

I just crossed the 1,000-subscriber mark for The Commercial Table 2 days ago.

Here is the demographic breakdown after two surveys:

- 50% work in sports and entertainment
- 22% working in tech and automotive
- 28.6% in VP/Director Roles
- 17% in C-Suite Executive
- 22.5% want to learn how big deals work
- 24% wanting inspiration for new ideas/strategies
- 44% working in companies ranging from $50M to $1B+ in revenue

Most of these subscribers came from:

→ Early email courses
→ Content on LinkedIn
→ DMing people
→ Close friends who were pressured into subscribing
→ Instagram partnership

Just cool to see who reads and watches every Tuesday. The content will only improve from here with more access to unique stories.

Press '𝗩𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝘆 𝘄𝗲𝗯𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗲' under my name ☝️ to join. beehiiv for the win!

Race of Champions went from a niche motorsport event to a 100M global viewership by changing one thing.

They stopped adapting racing for television and instead started engineering television into the racing format.

Most motorsport properties design great racing first, then try to make it work on camera. But by that point, the format is already locked in, and the broadcast experience ends up compromised.

Fredrik Johnsson (former motorsport journalist, now ROC President) flipped this.

In 1989, ROC introduced parallel tracks with crossover bridges so both cars stayed on screen simultaneously. They built it around a knockout tournament structure that audiences already understood, all inside stadium venues where every single seat could see everything happening at once.

They built the format for cameras first, then designed the racing to fit around that constraint.

Then they added three tactical layers that compounded the reach.

1. Cross-discipline driver strategy brought multiple fanbases to one event.

2. Free-to-air priority meant choosing reach over short-term revenue.

3. Market-specific adaptation changed driver lineups by geography, so each market got its own heroes.

Those two days of competition turned into 1,805 hours of TV coverage across 315+ broadcast partners, generating $69M in advertising equivalency from a single partnership deal.

Today’s newsletter breaks down the complete framework:

→ Format engineering that makes broadcasters come to you 
→ Why free-to-air distribution beats subscription money long-term 
→ Cross-discipline strategy that compounds audience reach 
→ Market adaptation playbook (Miami vs Sydney approach)

If you're trying to scale internationally without massive budgets, this shows you exactly how.

Full breakdown drops in 2 hours, link in the comments.

The IRONMAN Group offers three partner levels: Premier, Technical, and Supplier.

And they don't have rate cards. Every single package gets built from scratch.

I wanted to understand how they decide what goes in each tier and how they actually price it.

A simple approach would be to have fixed packages.

Tier 1: Logo placement here, hospitality passes, social media posts. 

Tier 2: Smaller logo, fewer passes, less activation. 

Tier 3: Minimum visibility.

Take it or leave it.

The IRONMAN approach:

Manuel Bassiere told me they don't work that way.

"We offer three partner levels, Premier, Technical, Supplier, each with a distinct focus. Some prioritise key branding pieces and content creation, others on-site activations or digital rights."

But within those levels, everything is bespoke.

No two packages look the same.

What changes from package to package:

→ Geographic scope (local vs. regional vs. global) 
→ Partner category (what industry, what objectives) 
→ Activation complexity (simple branding vs. integrated experiences) 
→ Rights granted (digital, on-site, IP usage)

Manuel was honest about the trade-off: "This is more time-intensive but leads to better partnerships."

The Bulldog example:

IRONMAN didn't approach Bulldog with a pre-built package.

They started with athlete survey data showing demand for skincare solutions.

Then they built the package around that specific need: 

→ Refreshing showers during marathon sections 
→ Recovery zones at finish lines 
→ Product sampling in expo villages 
→ Regional partnership scope (not going global immediately)

The activation focused on serving athletes first, brand exposure second.

What this actually means:

IRONMAN spends weeks designing each package.

They're not selling pre-defined inventory.

They're consulting on how to integrate the brand into the athlete experience.

The pricing reflects the custom work, not just the media value.

The time investment:

Partnership discussions run 6-12 months for regional and global deals.

Part of that timeline is just package design.

Understanding brand objectives, developing solutions, and creating custom proposals.

Most properties want to close deals in 30 days.

IRONMAN builds relationships over months.

What I dug into:

→ How do you decide what goes in Premier vs. Technical vs. Supplier tiers?

→ What's the pricing methodology when everything is custom?

→ How do you scale this approach without making every deal drag on for a year?

→ Can smaller properties replicate this or does it only work for established brands like IRONMAN?

Full breakdown of IRONMAN's partnership methodology in my newsletter archive.

Subscribe to The Commercial Table - link in comments.

Would you rather have a standard rate card (faster deals) or custom packages (better fit but slower)?

Photo by Grégoire Cohen (IG: gregggoire)

The email I wasn't expecting to receive this week:

I had to read this three times.

Plot twist: My newsletter is becoming meeting prep for motorsport executives 

They didn't just read it. They shared it with their boss. Who was in the same meeting? 

Before starting the newsletter, I set the goal: "How can I make people feel smart in their job?" 

Another reader jumped in: "The Reality Check section is the best, because it really shows what is and is not viable across different properties."

The reality check section is me asking uncomfortable questions like "but what happens the other 345 days?"

When I started writing, I was tired of seeing racing circuits with champagne problems and beer budgets. The piece about racing circuits needing 365-day revenue models? 

Someone called it "very good."

I wrote that at midnight, calculator in hand, angry about beautiful empty paddock clubs.

What started as me venting about the motorsport industry's broken math has somehow become trusted intel for commercial teams.

Still processing that my Tuesday night frustrations are now Tuesday morning executive reading.

Real question for my sports network:

What's one industry assumption you'd love to see someone finally challenge publicly?

(Apparently I'm collecting them now)

Alexander Witty built demand for a product that didn't exist yet.

Sold clothing for a year while building relationships with drivers. Then launched shoes to customers who were ready to buy.

I wanted to understand how he created urgency before he could deliver.

The clothing bridge:

Shoes take years to develop and manufacture.

Alex needed revenue and audience while solving the product problem.

He sold print-on-demand clothing through a facility in Bristol for a year.

"We spent sort of a year marketing a lot of clothing. It helped with some of our brand trips. And we would just try and build a bit of brand reputation through our designs."

Built a following before the hero product existed.

When the shoes were ready, people were waiting to pre-order.

The Pierre Gasly relationship:

£200 on product and packaging at Silverstone.

No contract or activation requirements.

Pierre wore the clothing because he liked them.

"It felt very personal, very separated from any sort of brand deals."

Ambassador-level promotion without paying ambassador rates.

The F1-75 event:

February 2025 with a major F1 fan event at O2 Arena.

Alex rented space 100 yards away. Put an Ayrton Senna F1 car out front.

His father worked with Senna in the early 80s, knew someone who owned the car.

"I paid for the delivery. I think it was 800 quid. But I was like, this is going to be serious."

Result: 1,000 people came through. 45 pre-orders that day.

Content shot at the event drove additional orders over the following months.

The customer acquisition:

Total: 100 pre-orders by late August.

No paid advertising and no influencer fees beyond product gifting.

Customer acquisition cost: Pop-up event expense and content creation.

First customer waited six months for delivery. 100th customer waited about a week.

What I dug into:

→ How do you build demand when you can't deliver immediately?

→ Can clothing pre-sales create enough audience for a hero product launch?

→ Does the in-kind partnership model with drivers scale beyond gifting?

→ What's the real cost per customer when your strategy is events and organic partnerships?

Full breakdown in this week's newsletter: From University Project to First 100 Customers.

Subscribe to The Commercial Table - link in comments.

Compound Footwear

Meet Shauna, who led SponsorX, her 15-year-old daughter rides motorcycles, and she’s a big advocate for women in sport, particularly women in motorsport.

 Sign up today for her powerful series, Driven to Disrupt

Global Partnerships, Sponsorships & Event Marketing Leader

🚀 Limited Spots: 8 Weeks. 8 Women. One Powerful Series. 🚀

I’m excited to launch the pilot of Driven to Disrupt: Women in Sports Marketing — an 8-week discussion series brought to you by The Shauna Wu Project.

This series is designed to bring together a curated group of women working in — or aspiring to work in — sports marketing, sponsorship, and partnerships.

Each week, we’ll gather virtually to share experiences, learn from each other, and build strategies to disrupt and lead in the sports industry. This is for women who want to elevate their voices, strengthen their skills, and grow their network in a space that’s often male-dominated but rapidly evolving.

💡 What you’ll gain:
	•	Insight → practical strategies for advancing in sports marketing and sponsorship.
	•	Community → a trusted peer group of women who “get it.”
	•	Confidence → a safe space to share challenges and wins.
	•	Purpose → clarity on how to use marketing as a driver of impact and change.
	•	A Personal Playbook → walk away with tangible next steps to accelerate your career.

✨ Submissions are open from October 3–17. The 8-week series kicks off the week of November 3rd.

👉 To apply: DM me with a short note about your background and what you hope to gain.
📣 Please comment and repost to help spread the word — let’s build something powerful together.

⸻

👋 Hi, I’m Shauna!
I spearheaded an award-winning campaign with the McLaren Formula One team and built sponsorship strategies from the ground up at a high-growth tech company. Today, I run my own consulting business and work with motorsport and sports clients to create impactful partnerships.

No alternative text description for this image

Taplio

Nirupam Singh's Linkedin Analytics

What is Nirupam talking about?

Who is engaging with Nirupam

's Best Posts (last 30 days)

Want to drive more opportunities from LinkedIn?