davieG Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 Leicester City may well be firmly at the Premier League's top table these days. But their income from shirt sponsorship is some way short of the likes of Manchester United and Chelsea. City have the name of King Power emblazoned across their playing shirts and merchandise - the company owned by chairman, Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha. And while the Thais have clearly pumped millions and millions of pounds into the club over the years, the money City receive from that shirt deal this season is £4m per year. Previously, it was £1m per year. That puts them in 13th place in the Premier League table for yearly income earned from shirt deals. New boys Huddersfield (Ope Sports) and Brighton (American Express) are tied at the bottom with their deals worth £1.5m. City are just ahead of Bournemouth (M88) on £3.5m and just behind Swansea (LeTou) on £4.5. And those figures can be put into perspective with the numbers from the top of the table, according to www.sportingintelligence.com. Manchester City (Etihad) and Tottenham (AIA) are joint third with £35m-a-year deals. Chelsea are second with £40m worth of income coming from Japanese tyre manufacturer, Yokohama. That's almost enough for two N'Golo Kantes. And Manchester United are top of the pile with a £47m deal with American car giant Chevrolet. The total spent by sponsors on Premier League clubs this season is an astonishing £281.8m. That is not only up from £226.5m last season but dwarfs totals from the next biggest European league. The German Bundesliga has attracted £101m worth of sponsorship this term for its 18 clubs. http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-way-behind-premier-league-237951 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr The Singh Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 Were being raped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucey Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 Not bothered, the owners can top up as much or as little additional money as they see fit, after what they've done. A couple extra mil won't make any difference really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 I imagine the club are not over doing the king power sponsorship payment whilst they dont need to. At some stage there may be a need to ramp it up and they can point to years of underpayments to real value. Can only assume they have been given advice in this regard as I would have thought precedence would be key here and last season a much higher value been renegotiated over a multi year period in the post champions glow. Could easily have put in a three year deal at 10m per season on the back of being champions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 Wouldn't make sense for King Power to be pumping a lot of money in via shirt sponsorship (which has no bearing on the action on the pitch), when their main aim is to improve the quality of the club across the board to make more money on the bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nnfox Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 With everything our owners have done for our club, they can have King Power on the shirts for free as far as I'm concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 Weren't the owners accused of paying over the odds for shirt sponsorship a few years ago to comply with FFP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 25 July 2017 Share Posted 25 July 2017 38 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said: Were being raped But not any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittlethorpeFox Posted 26 July 2017 Share Posted 26 July 2017 20 hours ago, Webbo said: Weren't the owners accused of paying over the odds for shirt sponsorship a few years ago to comply with FFP? Correct. They have to make the shirt sponsorship deals at "market value", otherwise they could inflate the sponsorship to increase turnover for FFP purposes. One of the reason Man City have the "Etihad Campus to produce youth talent", who they never end up playing, but they can then pay £100m for a few full backs. Chelsea do the same by bringing through so many youth players, they do not do this to bring them through the academy (last player to make it was john Terry even though they win the youth league most years) - the reason is to churn out players like Nathan Ake who they can sell for £20m to buy the Morata's of this world. Went a bit off topic but you catch my drift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpaM Posted 26 July 2017 Share Posted 26 July 2017 Ah well, Man U aren't winning the league are they, so I guess they need all the money they can get Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankMarvin Posted 28 July 2017 Share Posted 28 July 2017 Club Sponsor Value (2017/18 season) +/- (from last season) Arsenal Emirates (Airline) £30m 0 Bournemouth M88 (Gambling) £3.5m £1.5m Brighton American Express (Banking) £1.5m N/A Burnley Dafabet (Gambling) £2.5m £0.5m Chelsea Yokohama (Tyres) £40m 0 Crystal Palace ManBetX (Gambling) £6.5m £1.5m Everton SportPesa (Gambling) £9.6m £4.3m Huddersfield Ope Sports (Gambling) £1.5m N/A Leicester King Power (Duty Free) £4m £3m Liverpool Standard Chartered (Banking) £30m £5m Manchester City Etihad (Airline) £35m £15m Manchester United Chevolet (Cars) £47m 0 Newcastle Fun88 (Gambling) £6m N/A Southampton Virgin Media (Telecoms) £6m 0 Stoke Bet365 (Gambling) £3.2m 0 Swansea LeTou (Gambling) £4.5m £0.5m Tottenham AIA (Insurance) £35m £19m Watford FXPro (Banking) £3m £1.5m West Brom Palm (Eco-towns) £3m £0.5m West Ham Betway (Gambling) £10m £4m We was on 1 million after winning the league, surely they could write more off than that for sponsorship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom27111 Posted 28 July 2017 Share Posted 28 July 2017 It doesn't really matter. If we need to shift some money around for FFP reasons, I'm sure they'll do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sylofox Posted 29 July 2017 Share Posted 29 July 2017 Don't get me wrong I can't thank our owners enough for what they have done for us. But I have wondered if the club is getting a fair deal on shirt and ground sponsorship. Could and should we be getting more from the two deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn9013 Posted 29 July 2017 Share Posted 29 July 2017 5 minutes ago, sylofox said: Don't get me wrong I can't thank our owners enough for what they have done for us. But I have wondered if the club is getting a fair deal on shirt and ground sponsorship. Could and should we be getting more from the two deals. You have to take it in context though. King Power isn't just some random company, it is the company owned by our owners who have ploughed millions upon millions into the club to date. So as far as I'm concerned they can name the stadium after their company for as long as they are good owners. If it was a completely external company paying that money I would agree, it doesn't seem to be quite at market rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sylofox Posted 29 July 2017 Share Posted 29 July 2017 1 minute ago, rn9013 said: You have to take it in context though. King Power isn't just some random company, it is the company owned by our owners who have ploughed millions upon millions into the club to date. So as far as I'm concerned they can name the stadium after their company for as long as they are good owners. If it was a completely external company paying that money I would agree, it doesn't seem to be quite at market rate. Hey I understand that and what our owners have done for us. Shame some on here don't. When you get the we are mega rich comments. Our champions league wind fall won't last for ever. Some of the clubs on that list don't need CL money to earn what we did last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted 29 July 2017 Share Posted 29 July 2017 When you're sponsored by your owners surely the figure for the sponsorship deal is just a figure in the box to balance the books of the 2 seperate businesses? Technically every time they put their hands in the pockets for transfers, trading ground improvements etc then they're topping up their own sponsorship deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.