Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

[Tobes]

I believe clubs do get a percentage of shirt sales, but it's really low. Couple of quid or so on each.

It depends on the deal done. Most clubs get a share of the profits after a set number of shirt sales has been achieved, with all of the shirts sold before that figure is reached going to the manufacturer

 

[Zanjinho]

Who gives a ****

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

It depends on the deal done. Most clubs get a share of the profits after a set number of shirt sales has been achieved, with all of the shirts sold before that figure is reached going to the manufacturer

Yep I'd imagine this is true. Sort of like bonus payments involved in transfer fees when players hit a milestone etc.

@Diego - that's a very poor wum attempt mate. I know you're trying your best to justify that Pogba transfer fee but you'll have to try a little harder I'm afraid.

 

[Milk not bear jizz]

So how much are United getting from the Pogba sponsored Cushelle sheets?

 

[Diego]

Yep I'd imagine this is true. Sort of like bonus payments involved in transfer fees when players hit a milestone etc.

@Diego - that's a very poor wum attempt mate. I know you're trying your best to justify that Pogba transfer fee but you'll have to try a little harder I'm afraid.

So you genuinely believe that the official kit manufacturer of every club gets all the money from sales?

 

[HugoEkitikeN01]

Liverpool transfer news: James Maddison on verge of signing with Ryan Sessegnon deal close
LIVERPOOL are reportedly closing in on deals to sign Norwich and Fulham wonderkids Ryan Sessegnon and James Maddison.
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/foo...ich-City-James-Maddison-Fulham-Ryan-Sessegnon

 

[Garlic Klopp]

Liverpool transfer news: James Maddison on verge of signing with Ryan Sessegnon deal close
LIVERPOOL are reportedly closing in on deals to sign Norwich and Fulham wonderkids Ryan Sessegnon and James Maddison.
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/foo...ich-City-James-Maddison-Fulham-Ryan-Sessegnon

If that is true then with Kieta coming in that will be our business finished very early. Think Sessegnon is more likely to stay in London, we might get Maddison though

 

[moreinjuredthanowen]

If that is true then with Kieta coming in that will be our business finished very early. Think Sessegnon is more likely to stay in London, we might get Maddison though

who knows.

sessengon might stay at Fulham next year if promoted tbh and will cost a bomb.

no idea if these guys are really links or not.

I would expect however we will try to get non wc deals done asap but I fancy it will be tough to get players we want to move before wc starts

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

So you genuinely believe that the official kit manufacturer of every club gets all the money from sales?

As I've explained, the kit manufacturers take home sales but pay clubs for the contract. The brand is in charge of designing, manufacturing, distribution and sales. This is what is included in the kit deals. Within those contracts, as Tobes mentioned - clubs may have clauses which upon being satisfied, require fixed payments. These will include target sales figures, perhaps commission on club shop shirt sales (in the form of a discount for large stock orders).

I can really break this down for you if you're struggling with this Diego. Clearly this forum is a mixed ability group (at least when you're on it).

 

[Diego]

As I've explained, the kit manufacturers take home sales but pay clubs for the contract. The brand is in charge of designing, manufacturing, distribution and sales. This is what is included in the kit deals. Within those contracts, as Tobes mentioned - clubs may have clauses which upon being satisfied, require fixed payments. These will include target sales figures, perhaps commission on club shop shirt sales (in the form of a discount for large stock orders).

I can really break this down for you if you're struggling with this Diego. Clearly this forum is a mixed ability group (at least when you're on it).

Go on then, it should be an interesting read. Try to be specific with clubs and manufacturers though so I know who has the best deal

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

Go on then, it should be an interesting read. Try to be specific with clubs and manufacturers though so I know who has the best deal

United - £75m per season
Chelsea - £60m per season
Liverpool - £60m per season
Arsenal - £30m per season
Man City - £20m per season

This is not including shirt sponsorship (logo on the torso of shirts) and sleeve sponsorships.

 

[Diego]

United - £75m per season
Chelsea - £60m per season
Liverpool - £60m per season
Arsenal - £30m per season
Man City - £20m per season

This is not including shirt sponsorship (logo on the torso of shirts) and sleeve sponsorships.

Not really boke it down there have you, thought you were going to show me how manufacturers get all the sales monies

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

Not really boke it down there have you, thought you were going to show me how manufacturers get all the sales monies

Quick question, how do you think this all works? You think Adidas pay United £75m a season just to what? Make kits? Wouldn't that be based on the sales made? (If by your logic, United were in control of sales)

 

[Diego]

Quick question, how do you think this all works? You think Adidas pay United £75m a season just to what? Make kits? Wouldn't that be based on the sales made? (If by your logic, United were in control of sales)

You really struggle to read don't you, where have I said Adidas pay £75m just to make kits?

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

Oh looks like The Guardian did this for me: https://www.theguardian.com/football/the-set-pieces-blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths

Transfer window: exposing the widely held myths about how clubs sign players

Shirt sales don’t pay off transfer fees, image rights are more important than ‘war chests’ and clubs are more likely to use an agent than a fax machine to seal a deal.

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 United and 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.”

Despite the nonsense you may have heard about Zlatan Ibrahimovic shirt sales generating £50m for Manchester United, which would far exceed his wages, it’s simply not true. In fact, United don’t even automatically receive the 10-15% industry-standard royalty payment, no doubt because the up-front £75m annual payment is so large. United’s royalty payment only kicks in once a certain number of shirts are sold.

Just under three million Manchester United shirts were sold last season. As a case in point, let’s assume that Ibrahimovic helps sell an additional 300,000 shirts. A 10% increase is a very optimistic projection, especially considering Ibrahimovic is a Nike athlete and won’t be engaging in any Adidas promotional activities on his own. His image rights deal with United will almost certainly allow the club to feature him in Adidas promotional activities, as long as he appears with at least two other United players and the activity does not imply that Ibrahimovic is giving a personal endorsement to Adidas.

Additionally, while many United fans may choose to buy an Ibrahmovic shirt, over, say, a Chris Smalling shirt, a lot of those fans were already going to buy a shirt in the first place.

Let’s also assume that United’s royalty kicks in after three million shirts are sold, and the club receive a 15% royalty on each subsequent shirt sold. Assuming a price of £70 per shirt, that’s an additional £21m in gross sales from 300,000 shirts. Manchester United’s cut of that would be just over £3m. Now, £3m is not an insignificant amount, but it offsets less than 20% of what Ibrahimovic will likely cost the club this season (wages, agent fee, signing bonus, image rights deal).

So, at best, United are likely to see around £3m in additional revenue. While certainly not a paltry sum, it doesn’t come close to covering his costs, let alone help United earn an additional £50m. Put simply, there’s a reason why Adidas has earned more in the last six months than Manchester United, one of the highest-earning football clubs in the world, has earned in its 138-year existence.

Here is your breakdown. @Diego

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

You really struggle to read don't you, where have I said Adidas pay £75m just to make kits?

I was merely taking the piss out of your poor use of logic by applying it the other way.

 

[Diego]

Oh looks like The Guardian did this for me: https://www.theguardian.com/football/the-set-pieces-blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths



Here is your breakdown. @Diego

Did you read it? Turns out the manufacturers don't get all the money from kit sales

There figures are a bit out too

 

[Diego]

I was merely taking the piss out of your poor use of logic by applying it the other way.

Oh, is that what you were doing

 

[InBiscanWeTrust]

Oh looks like The Guardian did this for me: https://www.theguardian.com/football/the-set-pieces-blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths



Here is your breakdown. @Diego

You do realise that despite this being put out there a while ago by few sources and widely accepted to be the case, Diego still won’t believe you. Only way you might get him to believe you is if you get Fergie to come tell him face to face and even then he’ll get back out of the argument

 

[Salah's-left-foot]

Did you read it? Turns out the manufacturers don't get all the money from kit sales

There figures are a bit out too

I didn't actually say they don't get any. You asked if they don't get any and I never said yes or no. I explained the fixed fee plus bonuses/possible commission (which turned out to be the case)