Forums / The footytube Blog
Order: Newest / Oldest
Football Officially Sells Out
Footytubeblog (Blog) 5 years ago
This week Manchester United chief executive David Gill announced that the club have signed a four-year agreement with DHL to sponsor their training kit. The contract is worth £40 million and ‘breaks new ground in the English game’ according to Gill. He’s not wrong.

£40 million is a ludicrous amount of money for training kit sponsorship, it is more than most teams get for their shirt deals and seems like yet another way for the rich to get richer and widen the gap. Gill said that United are delighted to ‘pioneer training kit sponsorship’ which makes it sound like some intrepid step into a great unknown future when actually it just means promoting a delivery company during pre-match warm ups. The sums of money may be surprising but the deal itself is just another step into an increasingly ridiculous but influential aspect of the game.

Last season Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy decided to divide the club’s shirt sponsorship between Premier League games and Cup competitions. He was ‘pioneering’ two shirt sponsors, what a visionary. Of course this was just another way to get more money and in a business where absolutely everything is for sale, why the hell not?
The Spurs deal was just a gentle foray into new sponsorship territory, the agreement Manchester City struck with Etihad this summer has blown the roof off. A ten-year deal for £400 million! Along with the now standard stadium rights and shirt deals, there is also going to be an Etihad Campus, this will be on the land around the stadium. I wonder how much you could get to sponsor Tottenham High Road for ten years? Let the fast food bidding begin.
United’s deal only goes to show that nowadays you can sponsor anything even closely related to a football club and make serious money from it. I’m surprised Harry Redknapp hasn’t secured a deal with Churchill Car Insurance for his face, or Martin Jol for Grolsch, schtop! Fulham aren't ready yet.

The potential is literally everywhere. I’m amazed that Everton aren’t attempting to sell everything they possibly can just to make a signing. Why sell Phil Jagielka when you could just sell off the space on his forehead to Clearasil and his shorts to Eddie Stobart?

Every time I watch a game now I’m going to see deals everywhere! Anything would be an improvement on Luis Figo’s Just for Men adverts I guess. Haunting.
Ant (Liverpool) 5 years ago
It will eventually reach a boiling point where team shirts get completely changed twice a season and then the fans will revolt.

By revolt, I mean wear different coloured scarves for a season before forgetting why they were protesting. I recommend green and gold
Otownballer (Arsenal) 5 years ago
Thank you for rightly critiquing the rhetoric that businessmen often use to describe themselves and their ideas
Somere (Portmore Utd) 5 years ago
The first thing that came to mind when I saw the deal was "oh F@cking NO". How long before man city get a 100 million sponsorship from its owner's brother for their training kits or to change their training ground at carrington name.
Football is a business and it is very visible in clubs with great history of wearing red changing their kits to the color their rivals wear to make an extra buck
Bluezombi (Barcelona) 5 years ago
Its amazing how some people will ridicule another club (city) for something their club has already done. ManU sold training kit space, why is City being ridiculed if they do the same? Yes the owners brother might pay a ridiculous amount of money for it but they still won't be as sold out club as united is.

Btw didn't United just get on the Malaysian stock exchange which will bring them a lot of money?
Ant (Liverpool) 5 years ago
Agreed, there's no point saying "Wouldn't it be awful if Man City did it" when United have already done it. The problem is that just to keep up now, all of the top 8 teams will have to do it.

Bluezombi (Barcelona) 5 years ago
All of the top 8 can do it, I don't see anything wrong with selling out space on training kits. All of the football clubs should do it because that brings them more money which brings in more quality players either by buying them or by raising your own
Ant (Liverpool) 5 years ago
I don't want to turn this into a United bashing thread - most teams are every bit as much to blame, but United do seem to have the edge in finding new and inventive ways to sell their brand, to the detriment of the fans in some cases.

United were one of the first, if not the first to start pumping out two or three new shirts every season so the fans have to constantly update them. Here's a topic on the official United forum from a couple of weeks ago where people are calling it a joke


Here's an eye opener from the BBC

"Tottenham have launched three new kits every year for six seasons in a row.
The north London club have also decided that a different sponsor will adorn their home, second and third kits for Cup games this season, meaning there will be six shirts on offer, costing £45 each on the club's website.
Arsenal and Liverpool are the only teams who are releasing a new kit this season, who did not do so last term."

ManUK (Manchester United) 5 years ago
Well why not? Success at the top level takes a lot of money, we already knew that. Chelsea, got bought by a billionaire, and suddenly they won the Premier League. Coincidence? No of course not, money is a huge advantage so people will continue gain as much as possible.

You can't blame people for putting sponsorships on their shirts or selling a new kit every year. I mean, who would turn down 40m if the opportunity came along? I certainly wouldn't. United have just done a good job at selling their brand around the world and have become a bigger club because of it.

I'm not saying all of the sponsorships and advertising are necessarily a good thing or a bad thing. But it will continue to happen unless they're stopped for one reason or another (for instance if fans refuse to buy a new kit every season).

"Football officially sells out" I bet the same thing said when they first put sponsorships on the front team's kits
Ant (Liverpool) 5 years ago
What would be your personal line in the sand where you too would go "OK, now I actually agree they sold out". What if they stopped showing Man United games on Sky SPorts and you had to watch them on MUTV? What if the United squad suddenly had a player from each of the emerging markets (india, asia etc) purely just to sell shirts over there? What would it take for you to go ok, enough is enough
ManUK (Manchester United) 5 years ago
Personally, I don't really know at what point I'd break. But you could say football sold out a century ago when people started paying money to other teams to get a player they wanted. It all depends on what you define as "selling out".

Like I said, clubs will continue to gain money as much as possible unless something stops them. Whether it's fans refusing to pay, or if some sort regulations are put on them. That goes for everybody, not just Man United

I guess your right in a sense though. If they stopped showing United games on standard Tv I would probably go mad and I'm sure many other fans would be angry as well. But that's because it would affect the people physically, putting a sponsorship on your training kit doesn't do that
MikhailDuca (Juventus) 5 years ago
I am extremely disappointed that unfortunetly, football isn`t still about who plays the best, but about who has the most money to buy the best players around
Donnchadh (Liverpool) 5 years ago
Ay football has lost it's soul, the mighty dollar has won out again.... Haha f**k, there are still kids and adults playing all over the world for the pure joy of it though, no professional or money grubbing executives can change that always there is hope
MUMatt (Manchester United) 5 years ago
I'm not sure I would consider selling space on a training top as selling out. It has nothing to do with selling out, it has to do with getting your club financial support. It becomes ridiculous when the entire front of a squad's kit becomes a billboard of company names (like the European hockey leagues). If City do it that's fine.... Do what you have to to keep your club on top! I'm honestly suprised that this is just now occuring. I'm interested to see how many clubs will follow. There's nothing wrong with what United have done
Markodon (NK Dinamo Zagreb) 5 years ago
Football has become disgusting
Matt (Footytube Staff) 5 years ago
A lot of top clubs are going to have to find new sources of money.

This due to the new UEFA affordability measures that are coming in which basically means owners cannot spend more on the team (wages+transfer fees) than the club makes itself.

This basically puts an end to the sugar daddy days of Abromavich et al unless of course your brother owns an airline and wishes to give you 400mil for some sponsorship *ahem
FootyRulz (Chelsea) 5 years ago
City won't be the only that's going to try to find a way around the new rules. I expect more top clubs to start doing the same
FootyRulz (Chelsea) 5 years ago
I wouldn't be surprised if the showers in the changing rooms become sponsored for EPL clubs
Mastotronic (Tottenham Hotspur) 5 years ago
Glad someone pointed out the conditions around man city's sponsorship and the nepotism attached to it. Still, how is it that selling the warm up jersey space has crossed the line? Wasn't that line crossed the day they started getting jersey sponsors in the first place? It's business and it's not pleasant (I don't like wearing jerseys because it turns you into a walking billboard for a business I likely don't support) but it's been going on for years. But the warm up jersey? Too far! C'mon, get over it
Thegoodson (Philadelphia Union) 5 years ago
Agree with mastotronic, I won't buy a club jersey either because of the huge sponsor logos. I bet a team would sell quite a few more jersey's sin-sponsor even if they cost a bit more. Only national team jerseys for me

Kick4Life - changing lives through football