I do find it disappointing when you say you don’t know but you imagine. Everyone can imagine. Just say you don’t know. It’ll make the things you can answer more believable.
The business of football - what do you want to know?
- Thread starter Beamrider
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I think sponsorships are close to saturation level. There are some categories which are off limits at present such as tobacco and there’d be a mad scramble if they were brought into play but I don’t see that happening. The more likely development I see in the next few years is some form of clamp down on gambling sponsors. Basically, every club has a bookmaker sponsor and then the bigger clubs have all kinds of questionable crypto-currency / foreign exchange type sponsors which are essentially gaming of a different kind. These kinds of businesses seem to be big in Asia so clubs with a global pull are very attractive.
Probably the next development will be about how the sponsorship is delivered rather than a category itself. A couple of years back clubs were permitted sponsors on their shirt sleeves for the first time. Because that was permitted to all clubs at the same time, the value of those deals was probably driven down because supply exceeded demand, hence quite a lot of those sponsors are quite naff because big names couldn’t be persuaded to pay decent money. You could see a similar development with sponsors on shirt backs, for example, but the same value issues will arise if all clubs get those rights at the same time.
On corporate deals, I think it’s more about markets than categories. China is the next big growth area, and is still not really being exploited but for a club to really break China they will need to be more innovative. A big club falling into Chinese ownership could really cause a stir.
I’m thinking in term of what do clubs need to have in place to get bigger deals aside from the usual on the pitch stuff. E.g. raw numbers on social help, strong engagement helps. LFC got in nicely on the esports wagon.
Imagine disappointing Dreamy.
I don't think I could cope with the shame and pressure.
Ah, I see where you're coming from.
Strong social media reach obviously really helps and simply having a good strategy or a funny account manager can make a difference. We'll often see tweets quoted on here from other European clubs, basically because they're funny or because the content is a bit quirky. Having a campaign that stands out because of its innovation is definitely a factor, but that will usually be driven by the sponsor and a club's role is to try to get its people on-board with what the sponsor wants to do.
The key thing to any sponsorship deal is access to players and management, but there's only a finite amount of time that clubs can offer. If you are a smaller club with fewer sponsors, you can offer good access to players, but there's a good chance you won't have the category of player sponsors want - they want someone who is instantly recognisable in their market. But it's not just about a small club signing a Chinese player, for example, that player would need to be a global superstar to make a big impact. Probably the closest example I can think of here would be Derby signing Rooney. Whatever you think of Rooney, he's still a recognisable face and at Derby, who are probably not flush with sponsors, they'll be able to offer good access to him (and they've already got that 32 Red crossover going which created a stir). Whether they can pull in enough revenue to cover his wages will be interesting.
At bigger clubs with lots of sponsors, you'll see sponsors getting frustrated at not getting enough access, or getting fobbed off with lesser players. LFC are quite lucky at the moment in having a lot of players who are likeable and recognisable to the wider world. They probably have great pull in Africa with Mo and Sadio, although Africa is not that big a market, even if it is relatively untapped. The pull in South America is probably not as easy - as much as we love Bobby and Fabio, they're not at the levels of a Messi or a Neymar.
With all of this stuff, sponsors will want personal engagement, but this is a limited resource. When a sponsor wants to do a gig in their own country, they're not going to get a first team player to turn up and make a 20-minute personal appearance (unless the club happens to be on tour at the time), but that's what they want. Clubs need to find a way to breach that gap. At present, they're either using technology (i.e. videos, live broadcasts etc) or sending the odd ex-player to cover this stuff (which is fine, but it needs to be a genuine legend).
Can only go on what we've seen speculated in the press but it's obviously all about driving value.
Reality is clubs don't earn a great deal from higher shirt sales under typical deals. The sponsor will pay a fixed figure, possibly with some bonuses if the club qualifies for Europe / wins a trophy etc as this will drive higher sales for the manufacturer. If a club signs a marquee player, they will get some extra shirt sales, but the clubs won't usually get much benefit from that - they'll get an increase in the sales through their own retail channels, but a lot of clubs out-source their retail and probably won't get much of a cut on the increased sales (and their official retail will only get a proportion of that increase anyway). So most clubs only get a small share of a small share of the increase in sales.
I'm sure Liverpool's commercial team will have done their calculations on the Nike deal. From their perspective there'll be the option to benefit a bit more from increased sales and from Nike's perspective they'll have done a calculation that they can live with a base level of sales and will take the view that any further sales beyond that will pay for themselves. LFC probably expect that they'll get more brand loyalty from Nike than they would from NB, so that will drive the number of shirts sold up a bit, even before we get into the claimed better reach for Nike products. Couple that with the success the club is owning and the fact that the shirts will look different to anything we've seen in a while, simply because it'll be a Nike design, and there's a good chance this will work for both parties. I expect LFC were probably frustrated to be tied in to a deal with New Balance at a time when they were enjoying some real success but not sharing in the upside that New Balance were enjoying. Frankly, it's a good time to be striking a new deal.
The other thing for me around this deal was actually the court action with New Balance. I think that might put a lot of sponsors off working with the club. They really hung New Balance out to dry. If things don't work out with Nike, there'll be fewer options next time around.
The Wolf surely.
Correcting this
If he’s smart, he won’t call anyone because his mobile records will place him at the scene.
Obviously the agent is his insurance policy.
Is Beamrider a fan of retro games?
That's a big if.
Heh. It's a pretty safe bet he is.
Cheers for this @Beamrider ,it's a good read.
It totally explains why he doesn’t know what happened to Gary Megson.
Gary's locked away in your cellar, isn't he Gene?
It is possible that Gene actually is Gary Megson. He's patently pissed off that nobody ever asks what he's up to these days.
In my head Gene lives in an apartment, so wouldn't have a cellar. I don't know whether that's cos he told me he does, mentioned it on the forum, or cos I just envisaged that one day & it's stuck.
I tought he died. Would anyone come back from the death and using that opportunity on the same shit that killed him the first time?
Isn't Gene a New York City dweller? I imagine him to be much like Jerry Seinfeld in that respect.
No soup for you.
He is. Maybe that's why I think he lives in an apartment. I assume everyone in new York lives in an apartment, despite knowing loads of people live in those nice big houses they call 'brownstones' cos I've seen them on TV.
Gene lives in Frasier's apartment in my head btw. Dunno where Frasier is. Maybe in the cellar with Gary.
Frazers appartment is way cooler than Seinfelds
Frasier was in Seattle not New York.
The distance between Seattle and NYC is almost as big as the distance between Liverpool and NYC.
It was still an appartment
I know that.
I never claimed what's in my head made any sense. Quite the opposite in fact.
They're probably my most lucid thoughts. Most of the time it resembles cartoon clown driving clown cars in circles like in Homers head.
- Status
Similar threads
