Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Crapwell mentioned this in another thread, but I thought it needed hilighting. http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/news/Sponsor-...il/article.html The home shirts of Leicester City's players will have a sponsor after all this season – but only on the back. The club decided in January to have a sponsor-less home kit, as part of their 125th anniversary. But today they announce a one-year partnership with Leicestershire photographic retailer Jessops – for the back of the home shirt. The Jessops logo will feature on the back of the players' match-day shirts, but not on supporters' replica shirts. Chief executive, Lee Hoos, said: "During the past few months, we have resisted numerous approaches from businesses to sponsor the front of the home shirt. "Our innovative approach to giving the shirt back to our supporters has received an overwhelmingly positive response. However, there is a reality that next season we will be looking to source a main sponsor, so this ensures that we remain competitive within the market."
Guest Bilo Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Crapwell mentioned this in another thread, but I thought it needed hilighting.http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/news/Sponsor-...il/article.html The home shirts of Leicester City's players will have a sponsor after all this season – but only on the back. The club decided in January to have a sponsor-less home kit, as part of their 125th anniversary. But today they announce a one-year partnership with Leicestershire photographic retailer Jessops – for the back of the home shirt. The Jessops logo will feature on the back of the players' match-day shirts, but not on supporters' replica shirts. Chief executive, Lee Hoos, said: "During the past few months, we have resisted numerous approaches from businesses to sponsor the front of the home shirt. "Our innovative approach to giving the shirt back to our supporters has received an overwhelmingly positive response. "However, there is a reality that next season we will be looking to source a main sponsor, so this ensures that we remain competitive within the market." If we get Topps Tiles back, I will become homicidal.
maddog Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Crapwell mentioned this in another thread, but I thought it needed hilighting.http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/news/Sponsor-...il/article.html The home shirts of Leicester City's players will have a sponsor after all this season – but only on the back. The club decided in January to have a sponsor-less home kit, as part of their 125th anniversary. But today they announce a one-year partnership with Leicestershire photographic retailer Jessops – for the back of the home shirt. The Jessops logo will feature on the back of the players' match-day shirts, but not on supporters' replica shirts. Chief executive, Lee Hoos, said: "During the past few months, we have resisted numerous approaches from businesses to sponsor the front of the home shirt. "Our innovative approach to giving the shirt back to our supporters has received an overwhelmingly positive response. "However, there is a reality that next season we will be looking to source a main sponsor, so this ensures that we remain competitive within the market." I only bought it because of it being sponsorless, and now it isn't. Twat.
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 By the end of the season our shirt will look like this <_<
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 I only bought it because of it being sponsorless, and now it isn't.Twat. There were a few of us who were suspicious at the beginning, the club seemed to go out of their way to always mention the "front" of the shirt. By the end of the season our shirt will look like this <_< I would honestly rather have that than topps tiles.
Asha Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 That just sort of cancels out the whole 'gesture' of giving us the front of the shirt really.
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Picture of what it will look like on the OS http://www.lcfc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10274~1747201,00.html
Guest ttfn Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Crapwell mentioned this in another thread, but I thought it needed hilighting.http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/news/Sponsor-...il/article.html The home shirts of Leicester City's players will have a sponsor after all this season – but only on the back. The club decided in January to have a sponsor-less home kit, as part of their 125th anniversary. But today they announce a one-year partnership with Leicestershire photographic retailer Jessops – for the back of the home shirt. The Jessops logo will feature on the back of the players' match-day shirts, but not on supporters' replica shirts. Chief executive, Lee Hoos, said: "During the past few months, we have resisted numerous approaches from businesses to sponsor the front of the home shirt. "Our innovative approach to giving the shirt back to our supporters has received an overwhelmingly positive response. "However, there is a reality that next season we will be looking to source a main sponsor, so this ensures that we remain competitive within the market." What a load of arse. So we can remain competitive in the market?! As long as the football club doesn't go bust, we'll be competitive. Hoos has said himself that LCFC is approached by potential sponsors, not the other way around, so what he's saying is absolute codswollop. He's a horrible condescending little gimp. This is scandalous.
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 Picture of what it will look like on the OShttp://www.lcfc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10274~1747201,00.html Glad too see it's nice and subtle!!!!! It's as big as the bloody logo would be on the front. Complete and utter scum the people in charge of this club.
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 I thought we were going to have a sponsorless kit next season as well? Am I wrong or have they just changed everything?
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Glad too see it's nice and subtle!!!!! It's as big as the bloody logo would be on the front.Complete and utter scum the people in charge of this club. Almost as big as the print of the player name
bluebeau Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 It would be interesting to find an official statement from the football club regarding the new home shirt. Did this state that there would not be a sponsors name on the shirt or did the coniving bastards state that there would not be a sponsors name on the FRONT of the shirt? Either way IMO they have deliberately lied & deceived the supporters, not for the 1st time though. I feel as though the club have taken us for assholes & they don't give a shit 'cos they know we will still pay to go through the turnstiles!
Gené and Tonic Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Calm down people, it's only on the matchday shirts. I don't see what the massive problem is. We moan about not being able to sign players due to lack of money, then moan when we get a sponsor on the back of the shirt.
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 It would be interesting to find an official statement from the football club regarding the new home shirt.Did this state that there would not be a sponsors name on the shirt or did the coniving bastards state that there would not be a sponsors name on the FRONT of the shirt? Either way IMO they have deliberately lied & deceived the supporters, not for the 1st time though. I feel as though the club have taken us for assholes & they don't give a shit 'cos they know we will still pay to go through the turnstiles! It definitely said FRONT on the press stuff I saw, a few of us mentioned the fact they were always referring to the front.
Guest Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 What a load of arse. So we can remain competitive in the market?! As long as the football club doesn't go bust, we'll be competitive. Hoos has said himself that LCFC is approached by potential sponsors, not the other way around, so what he's saying is absolute codswollop. He's a horrible condescending little gimp. This is scandalous. Maybe the club needs the money to remain competitive? It's not like we've been splashing the cash this summer.
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Calm down people, it's only on the matchday shirts. I don't see what the massive problem is. We moan about not being able to sign players due to lack of money, then moan when we get a sponsor on the back of the shirt. But i feel so used
Bakey Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 I don't mind it as i think sponsors on the back of shirts look alright but do not think it will look great.
Gené and Tonic Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 glad i've already bought mine "The Jessops logo will feature on the back of the players' match-day shirts, but not on supporters' replica shirts."
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 Calm down people, it's only on the matchday shirts. I don't see what the massive problem is. We moan about not being able to sign players due to lack of money, then moan when we get a sponsor on the back of the shirt. It doesn't matter what shirts it is on, the club have once again pulled the wool over peoples eyes. We are all well aware of the money situation, but it was the clubs idea to go without a sponsor "for the fans", not ours. I doubt this sponsorship will net us any more than about 50-75k MAX!!! Wow... who can we sign.
Blue Foxes Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 It definitely said FRONT on the press stuff I saw, a few of us mentioned the fact they were always referring to the front. So this was obviously what they planned from the start, wait till most people have bought they're shirt and then the day of the new season slap a sponsor on it.
Guest ttfn Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 Maybe the club needs the money to remain competitive? It's not like we've been splashing the cash this summer. If you read the sentence that the quote is taken from, it is in the context of this being necessary so we can get a sponsor for next year, so no, that's not what it is. If he'd just come out and said, 'Look we need the money for players' then that would have been fine. But he's trying to make up some bullshit excuse for it
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 So this was obviously what they planned from the start, wait till most people have bought they're shirt and then the day of the new season slap a sponsor on it. Yep If you read the sentence that the quote is taken from, it is in the context of this being necessary so we can get a sponsor for next year, so no, that's not what it is.If he'd just come out and said, 'Look we need the money for players' then that would have been fine. But he's trying to make up some bullshit excuse for it And yep.
Gené and Tonic Posted 8 August 2009 Posted 8 August 2009 It's not like it's imposing though is it? The logo that is. I know for some this will be about principle, but honestly, I don't have a problem with it. The fact is that clubs need sponsors, there's a reason why Barcelona have been the only team to go without one consistently in modern times.
Babylon Posted 8 August 2009 Author Posted 8 August 2009 I actually like the jessops logo, I would wager that they will be our sponsor on the front next year. Anything but sponge bob square pants again.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.