The shirt sales myth

I'm sure there are still many of us who think clubs make a lot of money from shirt sales, but it's a myth. Most manufacturers take up to 90-95% of income from shirt sales.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths

"
No club has ever directly recouped a player’s transfer fee through shirt sales. Adidas, Nike, Puma and other kit suppliers get 85-90% of shirt sale revenue and this is the industry standard.

While there are some exceptions – a club such as Bayern Munich, which is part-owned by Adidas, may be given a slightly more favourable revenue share, and generally, once a certain (very large) number of shirts are sold, the revenue split on additional sales will skew more favourably to the club – these are the exceptions to the general rule.

As an example, Manchester United have a 10-year kit deal with Adidas worth £750m. This is one of the largest kit deals in football and easily the largest in the Premier League. However, the primary reason Adidas is paying Manchester United £75m per year is not simply to have a tiny logo emblazoned on United’s kit and use the club for marketing purposes. Of course, being associated with one of the few truly global clubs in football helps them capture market share in emerging markets and further solidify its presence in existing markets. But for the supplier, kit deals are licensing deals, and that’s where the real value lies to Adidas.

Football clubs are, by nature, football clubs. They’re meant to do football things. They don’t have the infrastructure required to manufacture and distribute millions of kits. Many can’t even handle running online shops, the logistics of which they outsource to third parties.

For any cynical readers who may not be so inclined to take our word for it – after all, it is a popular myth – just look at how Unitedand Adidas announced the deal in July 2014, where the partnership is described, quite clearly, as a licensing package. In fact, Adidas CEO Herbert Hainer triumphed the deal as a “collaboration [that] marks a milestone for us when it comes to merchandising potential. We expect total sales to reach £1.5bn during the duration of our partnership.”

 

But but Dave King said we wull get pure millionz so we wull. regards the peepo.

 

Interesting read.

It is something I know little about but arent clubs still turning a profit but they are effectively selling future income streams to kit producers up front. In other words, if celtic typically sell x number of shirts, and each shirt is worth say £35 profit to new balance then that income potential will drive the value of the deal they make with celtic? So the strip sale is still of value to celtic, only they have sold the income stream up front?

 

That is how I viewed it too. Sales predictions will definitely impact the amount a club is offered.

 

* I hate Man Utd.

 

Always makes me laugh when fans start going on about spending X amount on a player as that will be recouped in additional shirt sales, hopefully this will stop that in future.

 

Man Utd * saying that incessantly last year when they re-signed Pogba.

 

I'm fairly sure that's why shirts at the Celtic Superstore are more expensive, because the extra £5/£10 goes directly to the club...

 

Are they really more expensive?

 

Just checked now and it's £3 more at Celtic Superstore than at Sports Direct. So overestimated a bit, but I'm sure Celtic add on a few quid which is their take from shirt sales at the superstore. That's what I've heard anyway!

 

Makes sense tbh.

 

Same here

 

The superstore is still cheaper than the actual New Balance website.

 

Ah interesting...

Maybe it was only the case with Nike then? Different conditions on the contract...

 

Good article on the nonsense about Neymar making PSG rich and the transfer 'paying for itself' basically being mostly bullshit and spin.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbym...parating-reality-from-hyperbole/#574e338fc2f2

 

I think when you get into the realms of billionaire consortiums and even nation states buying teams, the traditional notion of 'worth' becomes meaningless. But it is still how most football fans think so clubs feel obliged to bullshit about someone being value for money

 

Buying certain players has bound to pay for itself though. If a shirt deal is coming to an end. Then suddenly say arsenal signed Messi Ronaldo, neymar and Griffiths.... Then surely a kit supplier will pay more to arsenal now as obviously shirt sales will go through the roof.

Obviously a bit of a * if you've still 5 years or more to run on the deal

 

PSG are signed up with Nike at €24m p/y thru 2022. For context, Barca reportedly get around €155m p/y.

 

Pretty much bang on

Also shirt sales have a direct correlation to sponsorship values when deals are being negotiated. Sponsors want exposure for their bucks and if you sell high volumes of shirts then they are guaranteed more exposure and this higher negotiating value for the club.

 

I'd rather spend that 3 pound more knowing club gets the money

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk