Usmanov

Azza · January 6, 2017

MickA said:
Whether LCC are entitled to anything I suppose is in the small print. Anybody know if MCC got anything from the Etihad deal?

As in LCC own Finch Farm so we pay rent to them, so that amount is just to cover the rental cost to the council.

andym78 · January 6, 2017

Milkman said:
What's in it for Usmanov though? As a sponsor, can he really make £75m back through commercial revenue?

USM don't actually need advertising because they're a company that owns other companies so they don't make or sell anything.

I'd guess the "extensive marketing opportunities" will be for the companies they own. If Megafon, for example, wanted to expand into the UK sponsoring a prem club would get them some pretty good exposure.

BlueToff · January 6, 2017

Woolly Blue said:
The 75 million is for both shirt sponsorship and Finch Farm. The Echo reckons the FF deal will be around 4 million a year.

Whether or not a holding company can really justify that commercially is a good question. But, to put it into context, Aon spend 20 million a year sponsoring Man United's equivalent so a precedent's been set and 4 million for us compared to 20 million for Utd seems about ballpark right so the value shouldn't give us any grief with the authorities.

So, based off that, £20m over 5 years. So the shirt sponsor-ship is approx £55m over 5 years.

55/5 = £11mil per-year shirt sponsorship, compared to what, around £5m per-year now?

In context, that's an extra 6/7ths of one Idrissa Gana Gueye per-year on top of our current deal...

BlueToff · January 6, 2017

andym78 said:
USM don't actually need advertising because they're a company that owns other companies so they don't make or sell anything.

I'd guess the "extensive marketing opportunities" will be for the companies they own. If Megafon, for example, wanted to expand into the UK sponsoring a prem club would get them some pretty good exposure.

While there's always a chance people could just be putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5, Megafon at this stage seems the most logical new shirt sponsor.

Khalekan · January 6, 2017

flibbyflob said:
I just see it as a way round FFP in the future. May be entirely wrong on that though.

Just can't think of other clubs who have sold naming rights to their training grounds.

And the fact that there is and it is not widely known supports your view, and mine, that this is indeed a way of working the FPP rules to our advantage

Have we at last arrived at the door of the banqueting hall with a ticket for admission in our hand?

Jamiednm · January 6, 2017

BlueToff said:
So, based off that, £20m over 5 years. So the shirt sponsor-ship is approx £55m over 5 years.

55/5 = £11mil per-year shirt sponsorship, compared to what, around £5m per-year now?

In context, that's an extra 6/7ths of one Idrissa Gana Gueye per-year on top of our current deal...

I don't know if you intentionally illustrated that in a negative light, or whether it was just the way it came across, but if you're more than doubling the revenue of your existing deal as a first step, you've got to be happy. That kind of money will make a massive dent in wages and infrastructure spending as well, it's not just all about signings.

BlueToff · January 6, 2017

Jamiednm said:
I don't know if you intentionally illustrated that in a negative light, or whether it was just the way it came across, but if you're more than doubling the revenue of your existing deal as a first step, you've got to be happy. That kind of money will make a massive dent in wages and infrastructure spending as well, it's not just all about signings.

Erm, I was being positive mate... I was trying to highlight that it's a great first step forward...

BlueToff · January 6, 2017

Khalekan said:
And the fact that there is and it is not widely known supports your view, and mine, that this is indeed a way of working the FPP rules to our advantage

Have we at last arrived at the door of the banqueting hall with a ticket for admission in our hand?

- AON Carrington Training Complex

- The Etihad Campus

Just two high-profile examples. They happen to be with the two biggest/richest clubs in the country, also.

Woolly Blue · January 6, 2017

Moomin said:
I think the four million will include finch farm, website, matchday visibility etc etc.

If it was just finch farm, I'd expect about 1.5 million at least of it to be paid to LCC.

Yea, sorry mate, when I said FF I meant the whole deal as per revealed at midnight.

The FF thing is really a bit of a frig to get the money in and is probably more justifiable than it would have been a couple of years ago because of the mini-stadium deal. It's almost like there's a plan which has been put together by businessmen who know what they're doing :unsure:

It's been a while since we've had such people at the club !

Tramps_mate · January 6, 2017

Callum_efc said:
Will be interesting to see how they argue around this multi club interest.....

Its been stated, your companies can sponsor who ever they want. They just cant own any portion of another club...

Woolly Blue · January 6, 2017

BlueToff said:
So, based off that, £20m over 5 years. So the shirt sponsor-ship is approx £55m over 5 years.

55/5 = £11mil per-year shirt sponsorship, compared to what, around £5m per-year now?

In context, that's an extra 6/7ths of one Idrissa Gana Gueye per-year on top of our current deal...

Growing the revenue at a football club is, at least, as much as servicing the wage bill as it buying players mate.

It's a gross oversimplification like but :-

TV Revenue : Funds transfers and part of wage bill

Other Commercial Revenue : Funds the gap in the wage bill

andym78 · January 6, 2017

BlueToff said:
While there's always a chance people could just be putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5, Megafon at this stage seems the most logical new shirt sponsor.

Out of the companies they own it's the most logical partner for a football club.

I expect USM buy and sell companies all the time, though, so if all the new sponsorship money is coming from them it could literally be anyone.

BlueToff · January 6, 2017

Woolly Blue said:
Growing the revenue at a football club is, at least, as much as servicing the wage bill as it buying players mate.

It's a gross oversimplification like but :-

TV Revenue : Funds transfers and part of wage bill

Other Commercial Revenue : Funds the gap in the wage bill

Oh yeh I know Wooly. Just using it as an example.

I think it's a great step forward, relatively speaking.

Spurs current deal, IIRC, runs until 2019 and is in total about £80m. So to know we've at least bridged a bit of that gap is nice.

Woolly Blue · January 6, 2017

BlueToff said:
Oh yeh I know Wooly. Just using it as an example.

I think it's a great step forward, relatively speaking.

Spurs current deal, IIRC, runs until 2019 and is in total about £80m. So to know we've at least bridged a bit of that gap is nice.

*Woolly

bluestevon · January 6, 2017

andym78 said:
USM don't actually need advertising because they're a company that owns other companies so they don't make or sell anything.

I'd guess the "extensive marketing opportunities" will be for the companies they own. If Megafon, for example, wanted to expand into the UK sponsoring a prem club would get them some pretty good exposure.

by and large Russian companies are looking to expand into the east now - after the troubles of the last few years etc, especially the chinese markets (MegaFon being one of the biggets ones involved in trying to do that), so given the commercial appeal of the Premier league over there, yeah makes a lot of sense if MegaFon is in the forefront of any new sponsorship/advertising etc