New Kit 19/20

[1882andallthat]

It gives me no pleasure saying this, and I shan't be posting the image on these hallowed pages, but if the Arsenal shirt leak today is indeed correct, then they're not just two of the greatest shirts in recent memory, but of all time. I think addidas are very good at making football shirts.

There is no such thing as a decent Arsenal shirt.

 

[rez9000]

Or in this case he's hoping he we can win the CL in these hideous white home's so he can sell a few more. I imagine they have a ton of them sitting in stock as people snatched up the away and 3rd this year. If they leaked the homes for next season and they weren't shit people would just wait.

Sorry, old chap, but that doesn't wash, for two main reasons:

1) Clubs don't make that much money from shirt sales. On average, every football shirt a club sells nets them around 3-4% of the retail price for licensing. If the club sells a shirt directly, they will also get around 20-22% of the retail price income. Put the two together and you get maybe 25%. With home shirts selling at £20 right now, for every shirt the club sells directly, it'll get around a fiver. Spurs sells around 300,000 shirts a year (the last exact figures we have were from 2016 when we sold 268,000).

Let's be ridiculously generous and assume winning the CL would net a 10% spike in sales (it won't be anywhere near that, but let's just say hypothetically) that'll only come to around 30,000 shirts. And let's also assume that every extra shirt is bought directly from the club, those 30,000 shirts would generate around £150,000. Peanuts in top-flight football.

2) The club are not the only stakeholder when it comes to shirt sales. Nike, manufactories, shipping companies, retailers, advertising agencies, delivery companies all will have a stake in the release of a shirt. Logistics companies will have been gearing up for weeks, possibly even months, in preparation for the slew of football shirts all being released in a short space of time. There is no way in hell that one stakeholder, in this instance the club, can unilaterally impose a change on the entire operation at such short notice. Certainly not without having to shell out a massive amount of money either to compensate for possibly breaching a part of the contract they have with the manufacturer, or to make up for losses that the manufacturer would undoubtedly incur in order to accommodate the change.

Simply put, a football shirt is not there to make the club money. It's there to assist the club in pushing its brand and to build relationships with fans. Even the manufacturer doesn't make much money from it. For each shirt sale, the manufacturer will take around 11% of the retail price - Nike will have far more profitable products that sell far more consistently. Football shirt production and sales are a marketing activity, not a money-making one.

 

[Lighty64]

Sorry, old chap, but that doesn't wash, for two main reasons:

1) Clubs don't make that much money from shirt sales. On average, every football shirt a club sells nets them around 3-4% of the retail price for licensing. If the club sells a shirt directly, they will also get around 20-22% of the retail price income. Put the two together and you get maybe 25%. With home shirts selling at £20 right now, for every shirt the club sells directly, it'll get around a fiver. Spurs sells around 300,000 shirts a year (the last exact figures we have were from 2016 when we sold 268,000).

Let's be ridiculously generous and assume winning the CL would net a 10% spike in sales (it won't be anywhere near that, but let's just say hypothetically) that'll only come to around 30,000 shirts. And let's also assume that every extra shirt is bought directly from the club, those 30,000 shirts would generate around £150,000. Peanuts in top-flight football.

2) The club are not the only stakeholder when it comes to shirt sales. Nike, manufactories, shipping companies, retailers, advertising agencies, delivery companies all will have a stake in the release of a shirt. Logistics companies will have been gearing up for weeks, possibly even months, in preparation for the slew of football shirts all being released in a short space of time. There is no way in hell that one stakeholder, in this instance the club, can unilaterally impose a change on the entire operation at such short notice. Certainly not without having to shell out a massive amount of money either to compensate for possibly breaching a part of the contract they have with the manufacturer, or to make up for losses that the manufacturer would undoubtedly incur in order to accommodate the change.

Simply put, a football shirt is not there to make the club money. It's there to assist the club in pushing its brand and to build relationships with fans. Even the manufacturer doesn't make much money from it. For each shirt sale, the manufacturer will take around 11% of the retail price - Nike will have far more profitable products that sell far more consistently. Football shirt production and sales are a marketing activity, not a money-making one.

that 150k would cover the wages of those that work in the shops, or other staff, or 10k per week towards 3 players wages whatever level. every penny has it's value

 

[rez9000]

There is no such thing as a decent Arsenal shirt.

That is a very ill-informed and reactionary thing to say!

They make excellent kindling. Also nappies.

 

[rez9000]

that 150k would cover the wages of those that work in the shops, or other staff, or 10k per week towards 3 players wages whatever level. every penny has it's value

But those costs will have already been taken into account, so the £150,000 extra would still be profit. The idea that we would upset a massive operation to make a tiny amount extra is neither feasible nor logical.

Spurs profits last year were £109 million. £150,000 represents 0.1% of that.

 

[Lighty64]

But those costs will have already been taken into account, so the £150,000 extra would still be profit. The idea that we would upset a massive operation to make a tiny amount extra is neither feasible nor logical.

Spurs profits last year were £109 million. £150,000 represents 0.1% of that.

as I said "every penny counts", did you ever get told of that expression, "look after the pennies, and the pounds will look after themselves".

I wished I'd listened

 

[rez9000]

as I said "every penny counts", did you ever get told of that expression, "look after the pennies, and the pounds will look after themselves".

I wished I'd listened

OK. So let's say Spurs want to look after the pennies.

Do you think it'll be free for the club to say, 'hold the factory line'? Surely Nike will also want to look after the pennies. Do you honestly think it'll cost them nothing to just stop their production on Spurs' say-so? Do you think the shipping companies who Nike will have already arranged to ship their shirts won't also want to look after their pennies? Don't you think the advertising agencies who will be gearing up for campaigns will also want to look after their pennies? And the delivery companies? And the retailers?

This isn't some tiny little cottage industry we're talking about - it's a huge operation going on in many countries around the world. You simply can't stop that on a whim.

 

[coyspurs18]

Whatever the outcome, the kit will be announced shortly after the final. Rightly so everything is being focused on the final.

Plus, the sales of next seasons kit when we have that star on it will be ridiculous whatever the design.

Will most likely be July based on recent History:

UA 14/15: 18/7/14
UA 15/16: 15/5/15 (H only) 17/7/15 (Away)
UA 16/17: 8/7/16
Nike 17/18: 30/6/17
Nike 18/19: 19/7/18

 

[MonsterYid]

Will most likely be July based on recent History:

UA 14/15: 18/7/14
UA 15/16: 15/5/15 (H only) 17/7/15 (Away)
UA 16/17: 8/7/16
Nike 17/18: 30/6/17
Nike 18/19: 19/7/18

I work in a large sports retailer and we get through our jersey launch dates a few weeks in advance. They have our home and away to be launched on July 1st with a navy away strip as the colour description. 3rd release is for September and colour description as blue.

 

[Lighty64]

OK. So let's say Spurs want to look after the pennies.

Do you think it'll be free for the club to say, 'hold the factory line'? Surely Nike will also want to look after the pennies. Do you honestly think it'll cost them nothing to just stop their production on Spurs' say-so? Do you think the shipping companies who Nike will have already arranged to ship their shirts won't also want to look after their pennies? Don't you think the advertising agencies who will be gearing up for campaigns will also want to look after their pennies? And the delivery companies? And the retailers?

This isn't some tiny little cottage industry we're talking about - it's a huge operation going on in many countries around the world. You simply can't stop that on a whim.

your now asking me to answer all those ?'s all I said was your bit about the 150k and you said £150,000 Peanuts in top-flight football. in life whatever you do as an industry every penny counts. if you make 150k a season for 10 years it's 1.5m a players wages that doesn't come out of other money

 

[CantSmileWithoutYou]

I work in a large sports retailer and we get through our jersey launch dates a few weeks in advance. They have our home and away to be launched on July 1st with a navy away strip as the colour description. 3rd release is for September and colour description as blue.

This isn't the BBC, you can say who you work for...

 

[rez9000]

your now asking me to answer all those ?'s all I said was your bit about the 150k and you said £150,000 Peanuts in top-flight football. in life whatever you do as an industry every penny counts. if you make 150k a season for 10 years it's 1.5m a players wages that doesn't come out of other money

Dude, those were rhetorical questions.

My point is that it's not a feasible proposition for two reasons. The first is the small amount of 'profit' and that the second the logistical nightmare and associated costs that would then fall on the club, which would wipe out any 'profit' anyway.

I don't get what you're arguing here, Lighty, to be honest.

 

[Lighty64]

Dude, those were rhetorical questions.

My point is that it's not a feasible proposition for two reasons. The first is the small amount of 'profit' and that the second the logistical nightmare and associated costs that would then fall on the club, which would wipe out any 'profit' anyway.

I don't get what you're arguing here, Lighty, to be honest.

I'm not arguing, I'm stating that 150k is a lot of money whether it's the premier league, or Joe Bloggs winning it on a scratch card.

 

[MonsterYid]

This isn't the BBC, you can say who you work for...

It’s an Irish retailer so the name wouldn’t mean a lot to a lot of people on here. Elverys Intersport is the company.

 

[rez9000]

I'm not arguing, I'm stating that 150k is a lot of money whether it's the premier league, or Joe Bloggs winning it on a scratch card.

Well, yeah, of course it is. That's not in question.

I think I see what you're saying - that you think I'm turning my nose up to £150,000. I'll clarify. I meant that it's a small amount of money compared to the sums that are often in play in football and that the smallness of that amount wouldn't be enough for Levy to consider trying to scratch it back, given that there would likely be other costs involved that would likely wipe them out, not to mention the work involved in doing so.

 

[Lighty64]

Well, yeah, of course it is. That's not in question.

I think I see what you're saying - that you think I'm turning my nose up to £150,000. I'll clarify. I meant that it's a small amount of money compared to the sums that are often in play in football and that the smallness of that amount wouldn't be enough for Levy to consider trying to scratch it back, given that there would likely be other costs involved that would likely wipe them out, not to mention the work involved in doing so.

is it 15 years we will be signed up to Nike? if it is then it would be too expensive to change. myself personally I think Levy if anything might try and pay AIA back if it meant a better naming rights deal that wants to have the shirt sponsor too (just my opinion)

 

[rez9000]

is it 15 years we will be signed up to Nike? if it is then it would be too expensive to change. myself personally I think Levy if anything might try and pay AIA back if it meant a better naming rights deal that wants to have the shirt sponsor too (just my opinion)

I don't even think the length of the contract comes into it, tbh. I think it's purely business practice. Ultimately, there's a contract in place that both sides have to abide by and I'd put money that the release schedule will be part of that contract. Not with specific dates, but something along the lines of once a release has been scheduled any change by either side would involve some form of penalty or charge.

Changing a sponsor is definitely more feasible. I would imagine there'd be clauses in the sponsorship contract that would allow either party to break the contract as long as there was some form of compensation. Likewise, not uncommon business practice.

 

[piedpiper]

as I said "every penny counts", did you ever get told of that expression, "look after the pennies, and the pounds will look after themselves".

I wished I'd listened

I had a General Manager who used that term.... My retort in a meeting was penny wise, pound foolish.....

I didn't last long... But I was right though

 

[piedpiper]

When does the AIA sponsorship end? I know we signed an extension about 2 seasons ago. Just can't remember it's end date.

Edit. Googled and it runs to 2022. which makes another 3 seasons with them as our shirt sponsor.

 

[coyspurs18]

When does the AIA sponsorship end? I know we signed an extension about 2 seasons ago. Just can't remember it's end date.

5 year extension in 2017...ends 2022.