Rags kit deal

CityStu said:
As I understand it, for a sponsorship to be challenged under FFP it has to be from a related party and represent unfair value. The Rags' Adidas deal is not a related party sponsorship and thus can't be challenged. Our Etihad deal was the same.

What their deal has done is set a new benchmark though, which I think we could use to our advantage. I don't think there's anything stopping our owner setting up a kit manufacturing business and sponsoring City. As long as the deal represented fair value (which would be well more than our £12m deal with Nike considering United's new deal with Adidas), it would be fair game under FFP.

Be nice to have the kits done 'in house' too. Southampton have created their own kits this season and they look very good.
Click to expand...

Thanks............You learn something new every day!
Still begs the ? Why such a massive increase from previous record of £31m pa to £75m pa
Something very fishy going on,
 
The fact they're going to make more in a year than we'll make in 6 (or ever so slightly less) is frankly an embarrassment. The deal was clearly well below what we should have received when it was signed and now it looks even worse. Ferran and co need to re-negotiate the deal ASAP because Nike has very few major clubs left on the books starting next season.
 
abellwillring said:
The fact they're going to make more in a year than we'll make in 6 (or ever so slightly less) is frankly an embarrassment. The deal was clearly well below what we should have received when it was signed and now it looks even worse. Ferran and co need to re-negotiate the deal ASAP because Nike has very few major clubs left on the books starting next season.
Click to expand...

We'll be repositioning our sponsorships very crudely in a few years I reckon, maybe not on kit deals(MLS is adidas kit only iirc), but say a car company or technology giant wants to sponsor the entire CFG, rather than just us? Could this be viable in order to get greater income?
 
i think their deal and our deal is not like for like.

the fact that Adidas is expecting £1.5billion net profit in 10 years alone, i spite of the operation and production cost, the commercialisation and the £750 million to get the deal I just dont see them even reaching half that estimation.

If net profit from shirts go for £30 if generously deducting manufacturing costs they need to shift 30,000,000 shirts in 10 years! thats 3,000,000 per year.

With Adidas being boycotted by the Arab countries in official sports since 2012, and Nike has a good showing in the US, the market is likely India, the Far East and Africa where knock-offs are a big problem.

I expect they will go all out with the fashion and originals like but due to their online store not supporting delivery to various countries unlike our online store, I cant see them reaching that demography as well as Nike that has at least 50 times more stores in said region compared to Adidas.

i think Adidas is being optimistic and may just drawn the short end of the straw. unless they bought image rights, which would mean they become the puppet master.
 
I keep on telling everyone.

14,000 extra seats and upgraded corporate facilities at the Etihad.
Additional sponsorship revenues from the training academy and bridge.
The leisure destination of national and international significance and Etihad Campus around the stadium. ;-)
The £1bill housing proposal/development in East Manchester.

Short-term pain, long-term gain.

And as I keep on pointing out, any club can only field 11 players at any one time, regardless of how much money they've got. And long gone are the days when United were the be all, and end all, and the only choice, when it came to joining a football club.
 
Nike will just sign a £25m a year with Chelsea ..... bet you there's a clause in the Scum/Adidas deal that Adidas cant renew with Chelsea.
 
Corky said:
They are in a different league to us now spending wise.
Click to expand...
Why? The rags are a cash cow for the Glazers and they'll now be milking it once again. The money they've lost and spent this last year alone will need to be recouped so at least quarter of this new deal will be put straight back into the family and shared between the brother Glazers.
 
Seems a bit odd that they get this deal the season they miss out on CL and Nike bin them for not representing value for money.

On face value this deal seems too good to be true, maybe that's the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.