Tag Archives: She Wore

The good and bad of Arsenal’s £300m Adidas deal

Arsenal are set to announce a new kit sponsorship deal with Adidas, 24 years after swapping the German sportswear giant for Nike.

The 5 year deal is reportedly going to be worth £300,000,000, or £60,000,000 a year.

It will see Arsenal bring in £114,000,000 a year from its 3 main sponsors – Adidas, Emirates and Visit Rwanda. This represents a huge increase on the £16.8million Arsenal received in 2013 from Nike and Emirates.

Here are my thoughts:

Ivan Gazidis showing his worth?

Some will point to the huge deals as highlighting what Ivan Gazidis does. That in his time at Arsenal he has bought in record revenues to the club.

But as the aphorism go’s; “a rising tide lifts all boats”.

Whilst Arsenal have broken club records in terms of revenues, it is in an era that all clubs are doing similar. In fact, according to Swiss Ramble only Liverpool have had slower commercial revenue growth than Arsenal since 2009.

Manchester City’s figure has to come with a pinch of salt – their huge growth has come from their mega-rich owners sponsoring themselves.

Back in 2009, Arsenal’s commercial revenue was 68% of Manchester United’s. 8 years later it is just 42%.

Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea & Tottenham have all increased their commercial revenue by a similar percentage, whilst Manchester United have pulled away from the other 4.

So is it a success that Ivan Gazidis has kept us on par with other clubs? Or would this additional revenue have come in regardless? IE everyone’s has risen, so it is only natural that Arsenal’s would have risen.

The new mega-record-breaking shirt deal highlights this.

Is it a success to shout about a new £60million a year shirt deal when Chelsea have the same deal? And Manchester City are set to sign a £50million deal with Puma. Everyone else’s deals have risen, so it is only natural that Arsenal’s has.

Meanwhile Manchester United recently signed a £75million deal with Adidas

The fact we have let Manchester United get away from us is a complete and utter failure of our commercial department. One that has held the club back for a decade, and why I am not too bothered if Gazidis leaves.

Double Edged Sword

Shirt deals are always a double edged sword in my opinion.

On one hand, the increased revenue coming into a club is much needed. It will allow for better players to be signed, which in turn should lead to a higher chance of success.

On the other hand, Adidas will want to see a return on their investment.

These huge kit deals we are now seeing throughout European football are the reason why we now get 3 its a year, at a cost of £60.

Back when I grew up, Arsenal would bring out one kit a year.

A home kit this year, away next year. The 3rd kit was basically the previous 2 seasons away kit, got out of storage, washed and ironed.

This meant every I got the newest kit, usually for my birthday from a grandparent.

One new kit a year, it was financially viable for all involved.

Now if you want a child to have the latest kits – and lets be realistic here, you do not want your kids to go to football training or school with an old kit – you have to buy two kits a year; or even 3 if you get them the away kit.

Regardless of rising kit costs, just buying the home and away shirt each year for your child double’s the costs from when I was a child getting 1 kit a year.

Now imagine you have 3 children. That is 6 kits a year minimum you will probably fork out for.

By the time you get a name and number on the back, you are looking at £45 a shirt. Add the shorts and socks and you are looking at £95 each. That is £190 for both the home and away, or £570 both your 3 children. For clothes which in a years time will be “out of date”.

A full kit for a 6 year old child with their favourite player on the back now costs £65. £130 for both home and away.

And these costs do not even take into account buying the 3rd kit.

Every time the new kit is released, I see fathers moaning about how much it is going to cost them to ensure their son or daughter has the latest kit. And they are right. But have they then also “celebrated” when Arsenal announce a new record kit deal?

Unfortunately, you can not have it both ways.

You can not have a £60,000,000 kit deal without 3 kits a year costing nearly £100 each.

Adidas will want to continue to see revenues increase, and the only way they can do this is by producing 3 kits a season, at high prices.

Bubble Bursting?

A final thought on this.

There will become a time when the bubble bursts on kit deals. When manufacturers are no longer selling the units to cover the cost of sponsoring the clubs.

In 2016/17 Arsenal sold 1.3 million shirts. It is actually fairly a low number considering the club has 13.7million Twitter followers. It probably highlights how many shirts get sold in foreign lands that are fake. But that is another article.

So lets say in that in the first year of the Adidas deal, 1.5million units are shifted, that Adidas have invested £40 for every shirt sold.

Now of course, Adidas do not profit 100% from every shirt sold.

They have manufacturing costs and the retailer (whether the Arsenal store, Sports Direct, JD Sports or any other retailer) also make a chunk of profit.

At current prices (£55 for the current Adidas Manchester United shirt), we are probably getting very close to the point where what Adidas are paying clubs, and what profit they are making are pretty much equal.

This will cause another rise in shirt prices as Adidas look to increase what they are charging retailers, which in turn will push the charge to consumers up. But this will only work if the consumer are still happy to buy the kit at the new price.

Like with the increasing football ticket prices, eventually you reach a point where the buyer is no longer buying, and the bubble bursts.

I wonder how much more kit manufacturers will be willing to pay the clubs until it no longer becomes financially beneficial? Or how much more kit costs can rise until families just stop buying?


 

So there we have it, the good, the bad and the ugly of Arsenal’s new £300million kit sponsorship deal…

Keenos

Aaron Ramsey set to agree new Arsenal contract

In the clearest indication yet that Aaron Ramsey is set to sign a new deal at Arsenal, his agency Avid Sports & Entertainment Group have tweeted a competition to win the Welshman’s shirt.

This follows a day of increasingly cryptic tweets from the recently set up sports agency.

Avid Sports & Entertainment Group we’re established in January this year by Ramsey’s long term agent David Baldwin.

Baldwin left Base Soccer in January 2018 to set up his own company, taking Aaron Ramsey with him. It is not clear if the Arsenal player has a financial interest in the company.

Early talk was that Baldwin was unable to represent any of his former clients for 6 months after leaving Base Soccer due to contractual convenance.

This resulted in Ramsey stalling in a new deal as he wanted Baldwin involved in talks, and to get a commission.

7 months on from him setting up Avid and it seems Ramsey, 27, is now ready to sign his new deal.

Ramsey’s wife, Colleen, is currently 30 weeks pregnant with twins, so it was always unlikely that he would up root his family – which already includes a young son – for a move abroad.

And announcement is expected to be imminent.

Keenos

Reiss Nelson to Hoffenheim highlights huge problem for English football

Reiss Nelson is set to leave Arsenal for German side Hoffenheim.

Nelson joins Stephy Mavididi (Juventus), Marcus McGuane (Barcelona), Chris Willock (Benfica), Donyell Malen (PSV), Kaylen Hinds (VfL Wolfsburg), Daniel Crowley (Willem II) and Vlad Dragomir (Perugia) to have left the club in the last 12 months for a new challenge abroad.

Whilst the mass exodus has not massively concerned me – none of them really showed themselves as having the ability to become a regular in Arsenal’s first team squad, Nelson is a bit of a surprise.

He is still just 18 and has had some exposure to the first team, having made 16 appearances last year.

Where as many of the others to have left us saw their places blocked by more talented team mates (Eddie Nketiah, Ainsley Maitland-Niles, Joe Willock), there was not really a youngster ahead of Nelson.

Arsenal’s lack of natural width, and lack of investment this summer in the wide positions, would have seen him compete against Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Alex Iwobi and Danny Welbeck to play for Unai Emery.

It is not exactly a list of top draw wingers. In fact none of them are exactly wingers, all preferring to play inside or upfront.

With so few natural wingers at Arsenal, Nelson would surely have got a decent amount of game time.

As with all the kids to have left Arsenal, I them all the luck.

I doubt moving to Germany is a financial decision. The contract on the table from Arsenal would have been richer than the Hoffenheim one. Like many of the other youngsters, perhaps Nelson just felt that he would not get the opportunity to play at Arsenal.

The easy option for him, and many others, would be similar to what happens at Chelsea.

To sign a new 4 or 5 year deal. Earn about £5million, and spend the time being loaned out throughout England. To the likes of Huddersfield, Reading, Bolton, Sheffield Wednesday and MK Dons (the path taken by Benik Afobe).

Moving abroad shows courage. It also shows a lack of faith or belief from Nelson that he would get a chance lower down in the Premier League.

There is a feeling that talented young attacking players will not get their chance in mid to lower Premier League sides. Teams who shun attacking football in favour of putting 6 defenders on the pitch. Trying to not lose a game rather than win.

The fear for Nelson would be that he joins someone like Burnley, Huddersfield or Cardiff, but is not given that chance and ends up with a season on the bench.

When teams are facing a relegation battle, they tend to pick experience over youth. Serge Gnabry a perfect example during his loan spell at WBA. Tony Pullis just did not want to take the risk on a teenage talent.

In somewhere like Germany, or Portugal or Italy, the financial punishments of being relegated are not as vast as they are in England. Lower teams in these countries are usually more than happy giving youngsters a chance; knowing that their main source of income is actually selling these players on.

In Germany, the situation at the moment is that Bayern Munich are winning everything for the forceable. This creates a situation where a lot of the enjoyment for fans of mid-table clubs is bringing through youngsters. Seeing academy kids get their chance.

German mid-table sides are just a much better environment for a young kid to get a chance than mid-table Premier League sides.

The amount of money in English football now puts so much pressure on managers for instant success which in turn is causing clubs to kill youth football as said managers are scared to play the kids.

Why would you sit at Manchester United knowing Jose Mourinho will not play you? Or at Manchester City knowing the next £60million signing is just a couple of months away?

Even a side like West Ham.

This summer the Hammers signed Felipe Anderson, Andriy Yarmolenko and Lucas Perez this summer. Why did they not take a chance of Nelson?

They signed 32 year old Aston Villa flop Carlos Sanchez over blooding through Reece Oxford (is he even still there?) or another youngster.

Whilst Chelsea and Manchester City have dominated the FA Youth Cups in recent seasons, and England age groups  performed well on an international stage, there is still a huge problem with young kids getting their chance at a Premier League club.

Keenos