SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
For football clubs to survive it is essential and a necessary part of procedures that establish perceived values for a Company to provide cash for certain privileges.
Shirt and Stadium figure highly and benefit both parties.
What about the FA though.
I think there is a real danger that the tail may actually wag the dog here.
Presumably for the massive deals that both Sky and BT negotiated with the FA they intend to pay for the sponsorship via subscriptions.
No problem if this was a direct agreement with individual clubs but it goes straight to the FA who then also apply the rules of the game via the refs and disciplinary committees.
My worry is that the subscription based sponsorship depends on the fickle public to subscribe so supporters like to see their side winning and subscribe dependant on form.
We are not yet as well supported as say United so perhaps it suits Sky, BT and the FA for us not to be dominant and let their potential customer base catch up. Or maybe I am neurotic.
Shirt and Stadium figure highly and benefit both parties.
What about the FA though.
I think there is a real danger that the tail may actually wag the dog here.
Presumably for the massive deals that both Sky and BT negotiated with the FA they intend to pay for the sponsorship via subscriptions.
No problem if this was a direct agreement with individual clubs but it goes straight to the FA who then also apply the rules of the game via the refs and disciplinary committees.
My worry is that the subscription based sponsorship depends on the fickle public to subscribe so supporters like to see their side winning and subscribe dependant on form.
We are not yet as well supported as say United so perhaps it suits Sky, BT and the FA for us not to be dominant and let their potential customer base catch up. Or maybe I am neurotic.