Aon Carrington - Etihad Campus

[Alioune DVToure]

How about this for an idea?

You make space for 16 advertising boards around the pitch - one for each outfield player in the starting 11 or on the bench. Each player corresponds to one company's ad. If you pay the most, you get Sergio, Carlos or Edin. If you pay the 10th most you get the outfield starter least likely to score (Nasti, Clichy). If you pay the least, you get the outfield sub least likely to come on/score (Sinclair). It's an open auction.

If you're Coca Cola and Tevez scores, he has to run over to your advertisement board and point at it when he scores, maybe even sit down beside it and smile while enjoying a sip of a cold one before getting back on with the game.

[BlueinBosnia]

there's room for at least 2 more sponsors on the shirt front.

Then there's the back, and don't get me started on the wasted opportunity of the shorts

Is there a rule to say only one sponsor allowed on a shirt?

I'm pretty sure there's a rule about maximum surface area that can be given over to sponsorship, although that may only apply to the Football League. I'm sure it was introduced in the mid-late '80s, and there was a ridiculous Coventry(?) kit design to get around it due to their deal with Talbot.

Edit: 1981-83, shown here: http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Coventr ... y_City.htm

[Risby]

I thought there must be some sort of ruling, otherwise our kits would look like formula 1 suits.
Why is it only the rags of have had their training kits and ground sponsored?
Are other clubs not up for it or is it they can't find a sponsor to stump up the cash? And why haven't we followed suit? It seems an easy way of bringing in extra cash.

[Blue Since 76]

I'm pretty sure there's a rule about maximum surface area that can be given over to sponsorship, although that may only apply to the Football League. I'm sure it was introduced in the mid-late '80s, and there was a ridiculous Coventry(?) kit design to get around it due to their deal with Talbot.

Edit: 1981-83, shown here: http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Coventr ... y_City.htm

Pretty sure I've seen lower league games though where they have a different sponsor on the back of the shirt. Maybe they've just reduced all the fonts to get round it

[BlueinBosnia]

I'm pretty sure there's a rule about maximum surface area that can be given over to sponsorship, although that may only apply to the Football League. I'm sure it was introduced in the mid-late '80s, and there was a ridiculous Coventry(?) kit design to get around it due to their deal with Talbot.

Edit: 1981-83, shown here: http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Coventr ... y_City.htm

Pretty sure I've seen lower league games though where they have a different sponsor on the back of the shirt. Maybe they've just reduced all the fonts to get round it

Possibly - I'm sure when I first read the story it was about surface area given over to sponsorship, not position on the shirt. Also, the rule could have been cancelled a few years ago: I haven't kept myself up-to-date with it. Would be interested to find out, though...

[BlueinBosnia]

Why is it only the rags of have had their training kits and ground sponsored?
Are other clubs not up for it or is it they can't find a sponsor to stump up the cash? And why haven't we followed suit? It seems an easy way of bringing in extra cash.

Haven't the Rags only announced this in the past few days? My guess is we've been waiting for a few clubs to announce and set precedent before we know what value to sign for.
England have done it for years. I think they signed a contract with Endsleigh or Nationwide in about 1997.

[Risby]

Haven't the Rags only announced this in the past few days? My guess is we've been waiting for a few clubs to announce and set precedent before we know what value to sign for.
England have done it for years. I think they signed a contract with Endsleigh or Nationwide in about 1997.

Their training kit has been sponsored by DHL for a while though hasn't it?
I understand we need to wait for others to test the water, especially as we are supposedly under investigation with the Etihad sponsor deal, but if we want to get in to the plus, we need new and inventive ways of gaining money.

[BlueinBosnia]

Haven't the Rags only announced this in the past few days? My guess is we've been waiting for a few clubs to announce and set precedent before we know what value to sign for.
England have done it for years. I think they signed a contract with Endsleigh or Nationwide in about 1997.

Their training kit has been sponsored by DHL for a while though hasn't it?
I understand we need to wait for others to test the water, especially as we are supposedly under investigation with the Etihad sponsor deal, but if we want to get in to the plus, we need new and inventive ways of gaining money.

Etihad are on our training kit, and clubs have already backdated sponsorship deals, so there's no rush...