Sportpesa

[Toffeelover]

Megafon on front of shirt, EITC on the sleeves.

 

[Gardocki]

The sleeve sponsorship is one of the few ways that we can generate funds for FFP. It doesn't make sense to donate it to EITC. There are plenty of other ways to promote the good work of EITC.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

The sleeve sponsorship is one of the few ways that we can generate funds for FFP. It doesn't make sense to donate it to EITC. There are plenty of other ways to promote the good work of EITC.

Exactly - stupid idea we are a football club not a charity.

 

[Brisan123]

In life in general any deal is worth what you can get for it. Bloody hard to argue that if Megafon or other, want to put in 50 million, why should they not be allowed to, as long as the money comes from the company concerned and the deal appears above board. If people want to buy stuff off me at 200% over what they could pay, why would I discourage them?

City's fault was that the money they said was coming from a sponsor, was coming from the owner - disguised as sponsorship. If the money had been paid by the sponsor, then no action was possible.

Incidentally, glad to see the back of Sportpesa, a poor man's PaddyPower - and they are crap too. Personally would like to see EiTC on the shirt, with a small strapline, sponsored by XXX, where XXX have loads of money and would have this altruistic nature. Can't see it, but that is what I would want.

Well USMANOV is a well known philanthropist (thank God for spellcheck )

 

[Wayno]

The sleeve sponsorship is one of the few ways that we can generate funds for FFP. It doesn't make sense to donate it to EITC. There are plenty of other ways to promote the good work of EITC.

I would be happy with it to be fair, it’s one of the biggest things we can be proud of.

I would rather EITC on the sleeves than £20m to buy Davy Klaasen again

 

[catcherintherye]

The facts you state, are indeed facts. Can't argue with them (and don't want to, proud of them).
Perhaps we're coming at it from different standpoints. I'm looking at it from the sponsors perspective. Whilst I agree that history is important to a brand, it is not the be all and end all. Companies do it also, and in the main, for brand awareness in the here and now i.e. How often and where will my brand be seen (shirt sales and tv). This is where Everton are still way behind the others due primarily to kitbag (our only awareness is online and not in shops worldwide as others are) and also recent success on the pitch (or lack of).
To understand how uefa judge it, is not easy, unless we speculate or are part of the process. That said, they will try and judge it based on facts and what you say is relevant, as is what I think. That's why I believe around 20m per season (100% increase in revenue) could be reasonable and arguable but more in my mind would be questionable (at the beginning).

My point is the club should negotiate the biggest sponsorship deal it can. Anything less than 4th in the league is massively under selling our market worth, and UEFA would face litigation galore if they tried to pull the club on it.

They are facing a challenge from City that they may lose, on a caste iron case. The 4th biggest club, independently negotiating a big sponsorship deal is not their business to interfere in.

 

[Brisan123]

The facts you state, are indeed facts. Can't argue with them (and don't want to, proud of them).
Perhaps we're coming at it from different standpoints. I'm looking at it from the sponsors perspective. Whilst I agree that history is important to a brand, it is not the be all and end all. Companies do it also, and in the main, for brand awareness in the here and now i.e. How often and where will my brand be seen (shirt sales and tv). This is where Everton are still way behind the others due primarily to kitbag (our only awareness is online and not in shops worldwide as others are) and also recent success on the pitch (or lack of).
To understand how uefa judge it, is not easy, unless we speculate or are part of the process. That said, they will try and judge it based on facts and what you say is relevant, as is what I think. That's why I believe around 20m per season (100% increase in revenue) could be reasonable and arguable but more in my mind would be questionable (at the beginning).

You do realise it will not be sponsorship as we and others know it
It will be pure unadulterated underhanded financial filth with no proof it is any but proper sponsorship lol

 

[Lmc2016]

My point is the club should negotiate the biggest sponsorship deal it can. Anything less than 4th in the league is massively under selling our market worth, and UEFA would face litigation galore if they tried to pull the club on it.

They are facing a challenge from City that they may lose, on a caste iron case. The 4th biggest club, independently negotiating a big sponsorship deal is not their business to interfere in.

Its obvious from the Sportpesa deal no company looking to sponsor a prem team sees us as the 4th biggest side in the league from an exposure point of view, though it's fairly easy to argue the case of us being the 5th/6th 'biggest' team in the league.

If we go with an independent company as opposed to one with links to Usmanov, I'd expect us to get around £14m a year, one backed by Usmanov would push us above £20m I'd hope, and that looks more than likely the way things will go.

 

[Bkk Andy]

Sponsors don't care about history. They care about now and that leaves us arguing about being the 7th or 8th biggest club. In terms of ranking our current deal is about right. In terms of £££ it's probably a little short

 

[degsy]

Give Sports Pesa back the balance of the £6.5M and tell them to do one and go with EitC until NEC sign up

 

[catcherintherye]

Its obvious from the Sportpesa deal no company looking to sponsor a prem team sees us as the 4th biggest side in the league from an exposure point of view, though it's fairly easy to argue the case of us being the 5th/6th 'biggest' team in the league.

If we go with an independent company as opposed to one with links to Usmanov, I'd expect us to get around £14m a year, one backed by Usmanov would push us above £20m I'd hope, and that looks more than likely the way things will go.

I think we are arguing different things and I'm not making my point very clear.

There is clearly a big gap between what I anticipate the club is able to negotiate and what would be fair and reasonable, from a legal perspective it would be entitled to negotiate.

I do not expect the club to negotiate a £30m per/a sponsorship deal, but if they did nobody from UEFA could bat an eye lid, and if they did they would be sued wi within an inch of their lives.

 

[Lloydystark]

Only negative is that we can't win the Sportpesa Cup back

Was there even a cup? Lol I went the game so I could actually see us win a trophy but I never saw one haha

 

[Lloydystark]

Has that ever been done before?

I know you were tongue in cheek but the idea has legs.

Big long rich sexy legs at that.

Some teams did it back the day but don’t think we ever have

 

[Connor]

Was there even a cup? Lol I went the game so I could actually see us win a trophy but I never saw one haha

Must have been because when we lost in Africa in the summer the Sharks went mad with one

 

[Lloydystark]

Please say we have kejian again and bring back li tie and li weifeng