Nike kits?

[Brennan]

We should be looking at what Villa and Spurs are getting really. What Liverpool get is irrelevant. Their brand is so, so much bigger than ours that it's not fit for comparison.

They're much bigger, but i don't think it's irrelevant. To clear it up, there are two things im annoyed about here:

1) The minute size of our brand internationally
2) The crappy deal we get, regardless of the size of the brand.

It's a one-two punch. We get stiffed because we're signed with kitbag, and we get screwed over because £3m per year is nothing.

Spurs have Champion League experience, but that's not worth three times as much. Surely.

 

[Brennan]

Oh sorry I was referring to the kitbag thing. I'm not sure what the difference is to be honest with you.

Kitbag pay £3m per year to have exclusive rights to sell our merchandise, LCS seem to have shockingly paid just £3m to produce our shirts.

In comparison Nike have a deal with United which allows them to sell the merch in their stores, as well as producing the shirts.

 

[billycopper]

Oh sorry I was referring to the kitbag thing. I'm not sure what the difference is to be honest with you.

I think Kitbag get to run Everton 1, Everton 2, Everton Direct etc under our name. They run the United and Real Madrid stores too.

I've found threads on other sites debating the deal. It does seem to be very low if it's £3m over 5 years. But, if it was the other way round, you'd imagine that Elstone would be banging on about £15m from Le Coq in the same way that he was going on about the 'historic' £30m deal with Kitbag.

 

[billycopper]

They're much bigger, but i don't think it's irrelevant. To clear it up, there are two things im annoyed about here:

1) The minute size of our brand internationally
2) The crappy deal we get, regardless of the size of the brand.

It's a one-two punch. We get stiffed because we're signed with kitbag, and we get screwed over because £3m per year is nothing.

Spurs have Champion League experience, but that's not worth three times as much. Surely.

If we're getting £600k per year for our shirt and Spurs are getting £10m, then something is badly wrong. They've had one season of Champion's League football and they have very few, if any, globally recognised players. They do seem to be getting in to the US though. Under Armour are an American company. They're also trying to do a deal with one of the world's biggest music promoters (I can't remember their name, but they own LA Galaxy), if they can get their hands on the Olympic stadium.

 

[BiggyRat]

Yes, but LFC sell 900,000 shirts per year...apples & oranges really. If we sold that many, we could command that much.

However as I have said before, there's nothing like walking around town with a big pink Coq on yer back!

 

[billycopper]

Yes, but LFC sell 900,000 shirts per year...apples & oranges really. If we sold that many, we could command that much.

However as I have said before, there's nothing like walking around town with a big pink Coq on yer back!

I was trying to find Everton figures to see if I could do the maths. The closest I could get was a quote saying that sales of the pink shirt were "encouraging". I'm sure Liverpool do sell bundles more than us. Torres was the most popular name to have on a shirt and it's reported that his shirt sales at Chelsea will pay his transfer fee.

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

Having a Nike Kit doesn't guarantee that our shirt will be on the shelves worldwide, I'm sure that if they only had one of each Nike kit for each team they sponsor they would need a rather large shop.

 

[billycopper]

Having a Nike Kit doesn't guarantee that our shirt will be on the shelves worldwide, I'm sure that if they only had one of each Nike kit for each team they sponsor they would need a rather large shop.

Apparently Nike made a real mess of things with Villa over the summer and they missed more than a month of shirt sales because they didn't get it out quick enough.

 

[SteveSC]

Having a Nike Kit doesn't guarantee that our shirt will be on the shelves worldwide, I'm sure that if they only had one of each Nike kit for each team they sponsor they would need a rather large shop.

I agree with this.

So what if Nike make your kits. If you search who wears nike kits there are some woeful teams who still don't get any recognition nor would you find their kits on sale in any major outlet.

Public perception and popuarlity is what sells kits not who makes them. Even the ugliest kits get bought by fans irregardless of the maker.

The reason it seems nike and addidas sell the most shirts is because they generally make sure they have signed up with the best teams.

But im sure in the kit maker race they would love to have most of the prem teams on board. They have tried in the past to try make exclusive deals with foreign football leagues.

 

[billycopper]

I don't think Nike is the way forward. American kit manufacturers seem to be where the money is at. Warrior wouldn't make ours as well as Liverpool's, so Under Armour or any other rivals would be the way to go.

 

[chicoazul]

I don't think Nike is the way forward. American kit manufacturers seem to be where the money is at. Warrior wouldn't make ours as well as Liverpool's, so Under Armour or any other rivals would be the way to go.

Nike are American aren't they lid?

 

[Brennan]

Nike are American aren't they lid?

Indeed they are.

Also billy, i don't understand how you came to the conclusion that Under Armour would be a better option than Nike, i really don't.

 

[Nordecke]

I agree with this.

So what if Nike make your kits. If you search who wears nike kits there are some woeful teams who still don't get any recognition nor would you find their kits on sale in any major outlet.

Public perception and popuarlity is what sells kits not who makes them. Even the ugliest kits get bought by fans irregardless of the maker.

The reason it seems nike and addidas sell the most shirts is because they generally make sure they have signed up with the best teams.

But im sure in the kit maker race they would love to have most of the prem teams on board. They have tried in the past to try make exclusive deals with foreign football leagues.

I can assure you most American Evertonians would rather dawn Nike rather than having to explain the rooster and Le Coq on their back..

 

[TheFinnFan]

what is this rumour. BS? would be ok to me.

 

[billycopper]

Indeed they are.

Also billy, i don't understand how you came to the conclusion that Under Armour would be a better option than Nike, i really don't.

The American companies who don't already have a presence in the UK market such as Warrior and Under Armour are prepared to outbid more traditional manufacturers to secure deals. Liverpool's agreement is the biggest in their history and even eclipses United's deal with Nike. Nike wouldn't be especially interested in us and so wouldn't offer that much for the contract. It doesn't matter if they've got stores all over the world if they're only interested in selling Arsenal and Man U shirts. Villa are reportedly so disgusted by how they've been treated by them that they've already decided to switch to Puma for next season.