The mancityfans.net football forum

Ferran needs to pull his finger out. We should be getting as much from shirt sponsorship as Arsenal or Chelsea.

https://twitter.com/br_uk/status/759993336920891392

Current PL champions on £1m seems far too low as well. When does our deal finish? Though one assumes we could negotiate a better deal in the interim?

Last year's PL shirt sponsors, with detail about deal length and years: http://www.totalsportek.com/football/pr ... hip-deals/

As the deal is with Etihad Airways, this can surely be 'renegotiated' at any time, no?

Current European shirt manufacturer deals (we're 11th): http://www.totalsportek.com/football/ex ... contracts/

Ths latter is more worrying as it is external, 1/5th of the amount United get per year, and runs until 2019.

If Etihad started throwing 80 million a season at us UEFA and the rest of the other teams cough cough Gill would be all over us RE. FFP. We need to bide our time with this and let Etihad because let's face it we aint getting sponsored by anyone else while we are owned by Mansour drip feed the deal to bring it in line with the others Nike though are a different animal all together they are playing us like cunts.

Patience.

lets all have a disco wrote:If Etihad started throwing 80 million a season at us UEFA and the rest of the other teams cough cough Gill would be all over us RE. FFP. We need to bide our time with this and let Etihad because let's face it we aint getting sponsored by anyone else while we are owned by Mansour drip feed the deal to bring it in line with the others Nike though are a different animal all together they are playing us like cunts.

Patience.

I think those days are well past.

I also think there is a fair amount of flexibility - we don't tell anyone how much we are actually paid and it may well be linked to media exposure, or something!

In any case I'm sure we will blow them all away one day.

Justified logic wrote:Current European shirt manufacturer deals (we're 11th): http://www.totalsportek.com/football/ex ... contracts/

Ths latter is more worrying as it is external, 1/5th of the amount United get per year, and runs until 2019.

That looks as if it's just the 'up front' fee paid to clubs (and from what's been written, the Rags' fee is contingent on them meeting a certain number of criteria) per season, and doesn't involve how the takings from shirt sales are divvied up. I'd take an educated guess that the disparity between the total sum us and the Rags receive from shirt manufacture and sales (and other associated odds and ends related to our respective Nike and Adidas contracts) isn't so great as those figures would suggest.

Justified logic wrote:Current European shirt manufacturer deals (we're 11th): http://www.totalsportek.com/football/ex ... contracts/

Ths latter is more worrying as it is external, 1/5th of the amount United get per year, and runs until 2019.

As much as everyone on here hates the rags. They still move a lot more merchandise than we do. At the time we were both under Nike it wasn't even close. Granted the last couple of seasons I'm not sure how much we closed the gap as I dumped all of my stock in Nike and no longer listened in on earnings calls.

BlueinBosnia wrote: I'd take an educated guess that the disparity between the total sum us and the Rags receive from shirt manufacture and sales (and other associated odds and ends related to our respective Nike and Adidas contracts) isn't so great as those figures would suggest.

Believe me, it is. They sell at least 4 times more shirts than us, and that reflects on the two deals we have.

I am saying this as an expert who studied this particular issue, as a partner in the only UAE sportwear manufacturing company.

I am not saying there isnt room for improvement in City's deal, we probably need to sell 400,000 shirts a year to make a 25M deal feasible for all partners.

In fact, I would offer 25M to City. However, I can only beat Nike/Addidas in design, match them in quality, but never going to beat them in distribution.

Abu Dhabi wrote:

BlueinBosnia wrote: I'd take an educated guess that the disparity between the total sum us and the Rags receive from shirt manufacture and sales (and other associated odds and ends related to our respective Nike and Adidas contracts) isn't so great as those figures would suggest.

Believe me, it is. They sell at least 4 times more shirts than us, and that reflects on the two deals we have.

I am saying this as an expert who studied this particular issue, as a partner in the only UAE sportwear manufacturing company.

I am not saying there isnt room for improvement in City's deal, we probably need to sell 400,000 shirts a year to make a 25M deal feasible for all partners.

In fact, I would offer 25M to City. However, I can only beat Nike/Addidas in design, match them in quality, but never going to beat them in distribution.

This makes sense - the situation will only change over the next 5 to 10 years and then only if we have continued success.

Sadly agree about rag shirt sales but what about Arsenal or Chelsea which is what I mentioned at the top of the thread?

I think I read somewhere that Chelsea sold as many shirts as United last year

Looked up the League table for shirt sales and I have my answer. We're not even in the top ten. Chelsea Arsenal and the scum miles ahead of us. Augero is our best seller. I suppose Kevin isn't going to be a top shirt seller even though he's a fine player. I expect the Club hope Sane will be and maybe Jesus too if develops as expected. Still we have a long way to go.

Abu Dhabi wrote:I think I read somewhere that Chelsea sold as many shirts as United last year

I think United beat their own record last year and knocked out about 1.6 or 1.7m

Surely the revenue from 1.7m shirts at a full retail price of say 50 quid, after splitting between retailer, manufacturer and club can't possibly make a shirt deal of 60m (gbp) a year financially viable from sales alone? Can it?

The number of shirts sold isn't going up anywhere near as quick as the size of the deals, which suggests that the manufacturers must be doing the deals at the biggest clubs purely for brand awareness & penetration into various international markets rather than profit?

blues2win wrote:Sadly agree about rag shirt sales but what about Arsenal or Chelsea which is what I mentioned at the top of the thread?

You can lay part of the blame on the U.S. for Arsenal shirt sales. They have the most supporters in the U.S. by a large margin.

JamieMCFC wrote:

blues2win wrote:Sadly agree about rag shirt sales but what about Arsenal or Chelsea which is what I mentioned at the top of the thread?

You can lay part of the blame on the U.S. for Arsenal shirt sales. They have the most supporters in the U.S. by a large margin.

Really?

Why don't we follow the South American route and have sponsors on the back of the shirt as well? Whenever I've seen Argentinian or Brazilian domestic football their shirts are plastered with different sponsors. Won't get as much as front of the shirt sponsors but it would be a few quid I'm sure

nottsblue wrote:Why don't we follow the South American route and have sponsors on the back of the shirt as well? Whenever I've seen Argentinian or Brazilian domestic football their shirts are plastered with different sponsors. Won't get as much as front of the shirt sponsors but it would be a few quid I'm sure

Please tell me you're joking. The additional sponsors ruin the shirts imo, 1000% not worth it

Moonchesteri wrote:

nottsblue wrote:Why don't we follow the South American route and have sponsors on the back of the shirt as well? Whenever I've seen Argentinian or Brazilian domestic football their shirts are plastered with different sponsors. Won't get as much as front of the shirt sponsors but it would be a few quid I'm sure

Please tell me you're joking. The additional sponsors ruin the shirts imo, 1000% not worth it

I myself much prefer a sponsor less shirt. My favourite is the light blue with white circle collar and cuffs with the badge in the centre. Or indeed the black/red stripe away from same era. But we are in a commercial world these days and if we are paid huge sums to have someone's name on the frontf the shirt, then why not get even more to have someones name on the back? In for a penny and in for a pound perhaps?

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:I think I read somewhere that Chelsea sold as many shirts as United last year

I think United beat their own record last year and knocked out about 1.6 or 1.7m

Surely the revenue from 1.7m shirts at a full retail price of say 50 quid, after splitting between retailer, manufacturer and club can't possibly make a shirt deal of 60m (gbp) a year financially viable from sales alone? Can it?

The number of shirts sold isn't going up anywhere near as quick as the size of the deals, which suggests that the manufacturers must be doing the deals at the biggest clubs purely for brand awareness & penetration into various international markets rather than profit?

The last part is a factor, but at the assumptions you stated, believe it or not, it can be financially viable too.

In an average full retail price of 70 quid (the case of United), the split doesnt typically apply until a set figure is met. So manufacturers would end up with around 45 to 50 quid on average from that. And when you consider that manufacturing cost is less than 10% of the full retail price, then there you go.

This is before factoring other sales like shorts, socks, and other branded sports wear that would make the financial difference.

In United's case, they are claiming full profits from other branded merchandise (also bearing full manufacturing costs), which is a good business from their side as well, and I believe it is the reason Nike opted out.

Moonchesteri wrote:

nottsblue wrote:Why don't we follow the South American route and have sponsors on the back of the shirt as well? Whenever I've seen Argentinian or Brazilian domestic football their shirts are plastered with different sponsors. Won't get as much as front of the shirt sponsors but it would be a few quid I'm sure

Please tell me you're joking. The additional sponsors ruin the shirts imo, 1000% not worth it

I guess English League rules do not allow more than one sponsor on the shirt. It is allowed here in Australia and in other countries apparently. Interestingly, in the match against Dortmund I noticed Valvoline patches on the City players' shirts. I guess this can only be done in pre-season !