Puma - £650M shirt deal confirmed

[Deleted member 77198]

Get ready for skin tight shirts, white sleeves, blue shorts, stripy socks and a load of other wacky “innovations” that Puma come up with.

Mundo Deportivo reporting it’s the biggest sports sponsorship deal in the world, so that’s great from a commercial point of view. Be difficult for the Fake News’ers to say Puma is an Abu Dhabi puppet.

If you’re reading this Puma; sky blue shirt, WHITE SHORTS and blue socks, either sky or navy. Nothing else. Ever. And we’ll all get along just fine :-)

Only the player versions of kits are skin tight (fitted to male body shapes)

Fat people can still buy box shaped fan version of its with Puma (to fit their heavily pregnant woman body shape)

The prices for the fan version are nearly half price to the player version with Puma - £55:£100

 

[nmc]

Can't believe people are happy about this, Puma make awful shirt designs and the players won't look as nice as they do in the Nike kits. Just look at arsenal's last kits with puma, no where near as good as ours with Nike. Would've much preferred a renewed and better deal with Nike.

Nike clearly pumped their U.K. marketing budget into Chelsea and Spurs - not sure why but they clearly were happy to keep us on the cheap but didn’t want to pay us our true worth. The club has done the right thing and secured the best deal it can.

 

[lee_wsm]

As long as we don’t get their stick on badges

 

[hawkhurst]

No it doesn't
Manufacturers will not recoup sponsorship on sales of a team kit. It's all about advertising the brand and the manufacturer makes money from all the other products it has manufactured.
As we are now one of the most watched football teams in the world we should be at least be on parity with Chelsea

I bet it does... According to this from 2016, Chelsea sold on average per year 550,000 more than shirts than us between 2011 and 2016. If you put a cautious profit of £20 a shirt (given they cost peanuts to make and retail at £55) that's £11m more in revenue a year. Yes, you want your brand to have more exposure, but if you can also make £11m more a year from one club that will undoubtedly affect the value of the deal. I accept they might not recoup every penny (although I bet they come close by the time they add on all the training equipment etc.), whether people actually buy the shirt is probably quite an important factor in determining how much you'll pay for a deal.

 

[richards30]

Can't believe people are happy about this, Puma make awful shirt designs and the players won't look as nice as they do in the Nike kits. Just look at arsenal's last kits with puma, no where near as good as ours with Nike. Would've much preferred a renewed and better deal with Nike.

i would imagine we would have more say in what the kits look like?

 

[Rammyblues]

Get ready for skin tight shirts, white sleeves, blue shorts, stripy socks and a load of other wacky “innovations” that Puma come up with.

Mundo Deportivo reporting it’s the biggest sports sponsorship deal in the world, so that’s great from a commercial point of view. Be difficult for the Fake News’ers to say Puma is an Abu Dhabi puppet.

If you’re reading this Puma; sky blue shirt, WHITE SHORTS and blue socks, either sky or navy. Nothing else. Ever. And we’ll all get along just fine :-)

A touch of maroon on the socks would be the cherry on the cake. Red and black stripes for the away kit is perfectly acceptable as far as I am concerned.

 

[dickie davies]

I bet it does... According to this from 2016, Chelsea sold on average per year 550,000 more than shirts than us between 2011 and 2016. If you put a cautious profit of £20 a shirt (given they cost peanuts to make and retail at £55) that's £11m more in revenue a year. Yes, you want your brand to have more exposure, but if you can also make £11m more a year from one club that will undoubtedly affect the value of the deal. I accept they might not recoup every penny (although I bet they come close by the time they add on all the training equipment etc.), whether people actually buy the shirt is probably quite an important factor in determining how much you'll pay for a deal.

Nike's turnover in 2017 was $34.35 billion

£11M is chicken feed

 

[I'm With Stupid]

A team that sells more shirts might get a bit of a bonus in terms of sponsorship, but it's nowhere near the bonus you get for being the best team in the world. Usain Bolt doesn't get $10m a year from Puma because they sell $10m worth of replica running shoes. He gets paid that because it allows the brand to be associated with sporting excellence, which is everything to sports manufacturers.

 

[Bruun]

Nike's turnover in 2017 was $34.35 billion

£11M is chicken feed

He doesnt add in the marketing factor either. Its a very poor mathematically solution in general.

 

[richards30]

some amazing mock ups floating around online already!