Adidas from 25/26
- Thread starter bluebell
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Kinda mad how much fuss there was over switching to Nike but didn't seem like it had any big payoff
I think that it went to the High Court in a dispute with NB contributed to it getting more attention than usual.
From what I've seen the Nike deal is largely seen as a success, but yeah, even with this deal we're still ~30m a year down on Uniteds contract with Adidas so there's more room for growth. United are locked in to a ten year deal though so they'll be chance to get closer during that period.
The Nike deal was much more lucrative vs the previous NB deal as LFC get a share of net sales.
Apparently this new Adidas deal guarantees LFC a significantly higher number compared to Nike. Will know more in the coming months when details come to light. Nike pissed them off by winning the German national team contract & Adidas is expected to aggressively target current Nike deals.
@Beamrider any idea how much we made from Nike deal please? I heard one Reddit commentator say £109m and the Echo was saying about £60m which is kind of shit when you think the Arse are making £75m before they've sold a shirt. Look at PSGs deal, which has a significantly smaller fan base but closer to $90m a year
I would suggest that there's the whiff of corruption in that deal.
Short answer is no. The club doesn't publish that level of detail in their accounts.
The only indication is commercial income, which moved as follows:
2018-19 (pre Nike) £188m
2019-20 (pre Nike) £217m
2020-21 (with Nike) £217m
2021-22 £246m
2022-23 £272m
So, in the first year of the deal, commercial income didn't move at all, but it did go up by £29m the year before, which may have been a one-off, the hole for which was then filled by Nike the following year. But I'm speculating.
Needless to say, there'll be loads of other stuff in there, so you can't put those figures down to Nike alone.
As per UEFA European Club's finance & investment landscape report LFC made 113 million GBP from kit & merchandising sales which is 4th behind Barca, Real & Bayern
https://www.thisisanfield.com/2024/...with the American,to have paid off handsomely.
Given it says it's UEFA sourced then those numbers should be legit, but I wasn't aware UEFA published this kind of stuff.I found this but PSG figures seem low considering how much Nike pushes them
It also gives a realistic assessment of where City sit in terms of the value of their brand to anyone who isn't in cahoots with their owners. If these numbers can be verified, I would be putting this in evidence in the 115 trial as proof that the Etihad and other deals are massively over-priced.
The United deal is an outlier though, it's more a measure of their ability to drive a hard bargain than an assessment of where they are in the pecking order.
Remember when that marketing guy at Chevrolet was sacked after they did the shirt sponsorship deal at a huge price? Wonder what went on there?
A propos of nothing in particular, I always had a concern when intermediaries were used in our sponsorship deals as I wondered whether some of their fee ended up in the wrong hands, as with the agents (allegedly).
Great point this.
I know that some sponsorship deals can be linked to signings etc, I wonder if this deal will have any bearing on Mos's contract?
Using the figures in public domain the 2022 - 23 commercial can be broken down as follows
Total Commercial income (published accounts) - 246m
Nike Kit & Merchandise (UEFA report) - 113m
Standard Chartered (media reports) - ~50m
AXA (media reports) - ~20m
Expedia (media reports) - ~9m
The above 4 deals add upto between 190 - 195m. On LFC website there are another 18 partners listed (a few of them were signed after 2022-23), which means an average of 3m per deal for the rest of them. Does that sound plausible given your experience?
They did a bunch of LeBron James collabs that I imagine wouldn't be possible with Adidas. Hard to say what payoff is/isn't as don't really follow our annual accounts.
This looks plausible to me.
On partnerships, £3m per deal is probably a bit high as an average, but there will be all kinds of other stuff in the commercial figures, including:
Retail income (NB we manage this in-house so this will be gross income, not just a percentage as with some other clubs)
Licensing income (i.e. people who pay us a royalty to make LFC-branded pencil cases or whatever)
Pre-season tour income (which would include ticketing income)
Catering and events (e.g. the likes of Players' Awards etc).
Some of the above will be included in match day income where it relates to first team games, but anything earned outside those days will sit in commercial.
To be fair, PSG do seem to sell a lot of shirts - just not in England - not in the Real, Barca, Man Utd, or Liverpool volume, but I’d seem more PSG shirts than other big clubs.
I still would love to know how much the Adidas is worth. Considering according to UEFA we're making more than Man U from Merch and Kit Sales it would have to be a lot better or Nike decided to renege
The retail guys at the club were always moaning about the kit and insisting they would sell a lot more (on Merseyside) if it was Adidas.
I wouldn't just assume the Adidas deal is worth more, it may just be that Nike feel they've paid out too much in the last few years and aren't willing to renew.
Still, at least it's not Castore.
There was this big hoo-hah about the Nike deal, now few years on its been binned. All we hear is that new adidas deal is worth £50m which can't be the sum total considering we sell way more t-shirts than anyone else
I’d expect there to be a fall across the board. There’s been news stories about the surge in kits being bought on the black market. Mainly from England and Sheffield Wednesday. The market is deciding that what is being charged is way too much and consumers will look elsewhere.
If that's our home kit, just in red, I'll love that. And our away kit, in white, with black shorts, ditto.
Only thing, that crest is vile... Looks like something I drew as an 11 year old. The perfect LFC crest is the one that I use for my profile pic. If we're going to go back to the classic look, that's the only crest we should be using.
Agreed. The price of the Nike kits is beyond obscene. The big downside of a bumper deal for the club is that it basically means parents having to shell out a fortune on kits for their kids as the manufacturers seek to claw back their margin. With prices that high, who can blame people for looking to the black market.
Not long after I started at the Club, one of my colleagues bought a few replica kits for her nephews but then realised that, even with staff discount, they'd have been cheaper at Sports Direct so she took them back and got a refund (thankfully she didn't get them personalised). Not quite black market but a similar principle in terms of the club losing sales because another seller undercut them.
I’ve kitted my lads in full home kits since they were born. To do it this year would set me back £120. The kit looking shit made it an easier choice.
I know I could get the knock off versions that would cost less than £50.They’d still look shit though.
My dad would let me get one like once every 5 years even back in the day (that makes me seem old). I feel like they were always expensive
At least when I was a kid, it was a new home kit every 2 years. 3 kits, plus keeper and training gear every year is a piss take.
- Status
