Mid table PL side to get Biggest Sponsorship ever.....

DanH84 · 14 Jul 2014 at 23:00

the liverpool deal is 6 years the graphic is just wrong.

DanH84 · 14 Jul 2014 at 23:04

np. I only noticed because I thought a 3 year deal was too short for that type of thing.

BaZ87 · 14 Jul 2014 at 23:29

Comparing all these kit deals is nigh on impossible to do accurately as we don't know any of the details other than the headline figures.

For example Liverpool's deal with Warrior is completely different to its old deal with Adidas. Adidas bought the rights to all our merchandise and placed huge restrictions on our retail side of things, Warrior on the other hand only bought the rights to our kit and training gear.

Iinm Utds deal with Adidas is similar to their old Nike deal where they've bought everything and will run their retail outlets too.

Clipsey · 15 Jul 2014 at 02:41

FrankJH said:
Laughs at Clipsey comparing Utd's deal signed in 2002 with Liverpool's 10 years later

How can you not compare? :confused:

Your current deal is x, Man Utd's is y for instance. It just shows you how good Man Utd have it.

Time might be a differentiating factor which you have to take in to consideration, but still the only thing to compare against.
What I was more getting at, was that Arsenal's was on par if not quite bit better than majority of the big teams out there currently (which is great, considering there are quite a few more teams ahead of Arsenal in terms of shirt sales, volume etc).

FrankJH · 15 Jul 2014 at 02:48

time "MIGHT BE" a differentiating factor if its a couple of years - a DECADE is a completely different ball park and even then it was only beaten by about £1m (or 5%)

Clipsey · 15 Jul 2014 at 02:58

Well, obviously, but the current deals in place are all that you can compare against. I'm not sure what you are getting at?

dmcg · 15 Jul 2014 at 16:24

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza...wittersf&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

woodward right now

Loki · 15 Jul 2014 at 19:08

BaZ87 said:
Comparing all these kit deals is nigh on impossible to do accurately as we don't know any of the details other than the headline figures.

For example Liverpool's deal with Warrior is completely different to its old deal with Adidas. Adidas bought the rights to all our merchandise and placed huge restrictions on our retail side of things, Warrior on the other hand only bought the rights to our kit and training gear.

Iinm Utds deal with Adidas is similar to their old Nike deal where they've bought everything and will run their retail outlets too.

This is true.

I wonder if the deal is a basic £75m a year or a down payment first year then say £50m every year after it

elmuzzy66. · 16 Jul 2014 at 13:47

Would the value of the deal change up or down depending on utd performance on the pitch? O

DanH84 · 16 Jul 2014 at 19:15

possibly, it's a guaranteed minimum of £750million so there could be performance related clauses that make it higher or a profit share, numerous things really. Apart from the guaranteed figure it's all just speculation currently though.

fez · 31 Jul 2014 at 13:55

So if we miss out on CL 2 seasons in a row then we will lose 1/3 of the 75m. Thats pretty unlikely. Without Moyes I don't expect us to have too many issues getting top 4 once over 2 seasons.

FrankJH · 31 Jul 2014 at 17:23

notes failure to mention the possibility of it getting larger through winning EPL, CL etc.....

BaZ87 · 20 Aug 2014 at 22:06

I'll stick this in here as they were reportedly bidding for the Utd deal. Warrior are reportedly pulling out of Football at the end of this season and New Balance (their parent company) will be taking over their shirt deals.