I Mean your case in point there Bayern the 3rd biggest club on earth had no control over the change of the home kit, its also happened to Barcelona a few seasons ago.Well it's time we made a stance, it a great honour for any company to be allowed the opportunity to produce the kit of Manchester City Football club.
As said we insist on a basic home kit of sky blue and white, the rest is up to them.
I can't imagine a club not far from here allowing Adidas to produce an all red kit, can you?
Bayern let Adidas change their kit last year to all red, big mistake, fans not happy and next season they go back to tradition.
As said, the kits manufacture's are representing the clubs not the other way round.I Mean your case in point there Bayern the 3rd biggest club on earth had no control over the change of the home kit, its also happened to Barcelona a few seasons ago.
They could make a stance but has anyone asked the board and owner if they like it, has anyone written to them to complain maybe got a petition going, thats the way to turn heads, they wont be reading on here or have agents listening in the pubs
The problem is once the club becomes bigger the actual match going supporters only represent a tiny amount of the support which is heavily represented on here.As said, the kits manufacture's are representing the clubs not the other way round.
The clubs are giving in to easily, time to stop. The quality of the Nike kits/clothing is very poor. The club should be protecting it's customers and not just chasing the cash.
Agreed, but this club is in a very different position to the others. We have incredibly rich owners, so we can be "choosey" about which deal we sign.The problem is once the club becomes bigger the actual match going supporters only represent a tiny amount of the support which is heavily represented on here.
Unfortunatly mate its all about the money now because if you not earning big money you cant go forwards and we are not allowed money from the owner anymore to make up our defecits
It always baffles me when I read how much these companies are paying per year for various sports teams and other sponsorships. I mean, how much do Nike actually make a year? Is it in the billions? It needs to be if they're spunking around 500m + on endorsements.
I understand why they do it but I suppose the numbers just seem huge to me in outgoings.
It always baffles me when I read how much these companies are paying per year for various sports teams and other sponsorships. I mean, how much do Nike actually make a year? Is it in the billions? It needs to be if they're spunking around 500m + on endorsements.
I understand why they do it but I suppose the numbers just seem huge to me in outgoings.
That's kind of what I was wondering. So they do have a hefty turnover and I suppose with the sweatshops that make the gear equating to about £50 a year in wages it does give them a bit of wriggle room for sponsorships.Nike's turnover last year was over $30billion.
The market cap (value of the company) is over $85billion
The brand value on it's own, is worth $20billion.
So upgrading City's deal from £12m a year to £25m a year really isn't going to touch the sides.
Fred Perry's a Tennis make though?It's been mentioned on here before
It would be wonderful for City to join in a partnership with a company of high reputation and quality, someone like Fred Perry.
Imagine a very high quality Fred Perry City shirt, minimal design but high quality material and finish.
Together with a quality range of clothing/merchandise, I think fans worldwide would identify and desire this, even at a premium price.