Next seasons kit choice?

[One87One]

Away kit is black and red, red badge.

[Hendo]

Away kit is black and red, red badge.

Quoted for prosperity...

Although if it is anything like this



or this



I will be very happy.

[paultheroyal]

Its different, I'll give them that



Although if you look at it, without the massive logo, it would probably be a very nice looking kit.

It’s a wind-up. It breaks all sponsor logo rules. It’s just PaddyPower doing what they do best.

But when is it not a wind up? Because they wore it last night!

[One87One]

It's a typical Paddy Power publicity stunt. It's a friendly. You can wear what you want.

[Hendo]

It's a typical Paddy Power publicity stunt. It's a friendly. You can wear what you want.

FA regulations clearly state a playing kit is only permitted to have "one single area not exceeding 250 square centimetres on the front of the shirt".

Huddersfield have said it will be their home kit for the upcoming season and confirmed it will go on sale on Saturday.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49026053

[Green]

well yes but getting a better rate =/= paying a premium which was the point previously being made

Anyway, I've done some research through some unashamedly ITK pals and as I now understand it there's no such late/early premium anyway. These contracts work as so:

[*]Kit manufacturer (KM) provides £X in value in kind of kit/training gear to club. The value of the kit is detailed within the contract but is usually 50% of the retail value

[*]KM will pay the club a % of revenue of kit sold outside of the clubs own means (i.e. the megastore) - usually about 30%

[*]The club will typically have a purchasing obligation over and above the value in kind for which the % bonus also applies

[*]A critical path will be detailed with the contract stipulating deadlines for design work, samples, delivery d8s and so on - as I understand it, the KMs understandably prefer getting the orders confirmed early - and certainly wouldn't look to provide any kind of financial incentive to leave it l8.

Obvs this isn't how your Man Utds and your Real Madrids do things but for a club like Reading this would be pretty standard

KM's typically take around 90% of shirt sale revenue generated. The cubs make their money on the kit deal and sponsorship of the shirt rather than the actual shirt sales.

Nice gig if you can get it - I think I'm in the wrong business.

[muirinho]

well yes but getting a better rate =/= paying a premium which was the point previously being made

Anyway, I've done some research through some unashamedly ITK pals and as I now understand it there's no such late/early premium anyway. These contracts work as so:

[*]Kit manufacturer (KM) provides £X in value in kind of kit/training gear to club. The value of the kit is detailed within the contract but is usually 50% of the retail value

[*]KM will pay the club a % of revenue of kit sold outside of the clubs own means (i.e. the megastore) - usually about 30%

[*]The club will typically have a purchasing obligation over and above the value in kind for which the % bonus also applies

[*]A critical path will be detailed with the contract stipulating deadlines for design work, samples, delivery d8s and so on - as I understand it, the KMs understandably prefer getting the orders confirmed early - and certainly wouldn't look to provide any kind of financial incentive to leave it l8.

Obvs this isn't how your Man Utds and your Real Madrids do things but for a club like Reading this would be pretty standard

KM's typically take around 90% of shirt sale revenue generated. The cubs make their money on the kit deal and sponsorship of the shirt rather than the actual shirt sales.

If that's the case, the club aren't going to make a killing if they happen to shift some extra shirts because the kit was released earlier in the season. So if it causes problems having an early release, for whatever reason, it's not going to be worth it financially to change things to avoid those problems.

[Winston Biscuit]

I have no idea about timing of kit release but the clubs making only around 10% (some bigger ones make up to 15% but that is negotiated against the overall kit deal) is fairly well known. Bayern Munich being the anomaly due to their ownership.

As soon as people started pushing the myth that 'Beckham's transfer to Real Madrid was paid for in 2 weeks due to shirt sales!', you had people within the industry writing up stories explaining the real finances behind kit deals and shirt sales

[NewCorkSeth]

It's a typical Paddy Power publicity stunt. It's a friendly. You can wear what you want.

FA regulations clearly state a playing kit is only permitted to have "one single area not exceeding 250 square centimetres on the front of the shirt".

Huddersfield have said it will be their home kit for the upcoming season and confirmed it will go on sale on Saturday.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49026053

Paddy Power may be a bunch if gobshite, banter merchants but they have played a blinder with the new "unsponsered" kit. It looks gorgeous.

[One87One]

Hudds now revealed their new kit and to their credit it's mint!

[Hound]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

[NewCorkSeth]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

[Hound]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

yep, their advertising etc is top notch tbf, very original, and with a bit of humour

[One87One]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

Very clever indeed, and it may influence other better firms to not have their logo across the shirts in future - we hope.

[NewCorkSeth]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

Very clever indeed, and it may influence other better firms to not have their logo across the shirts in future - we hope.

One can only wish. I still kinda hope our Casumo marshmallow man makes an appearance somewhere. Either one of those inflatable sumo suits as a new mascot or they make some football gifs for use during games.

[From Despair To Where?]

yeah its great. How bloody weird the whole thing is, but its certainly done its job

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

Very clever indeed, and it may influence other better firms to not have their logo across the shirts in future - we hope.

That's up there with their egg and spoon race stunt.

[CrowthorneRoyal]

Clever marketing. They were well aware about fans attitudes towards both large sponsorships and betting sponsorships. The mislead itself would have somewhat mitigated the overall sponsorship if they did put a logo on the shirt. The decision to not put a logo on the shirt is a hugely popular decision and everyone will know Paddy Power is the sponsor despite the invisibility. Clever.

Very clever indeed, and it may influence other better firms to not have their logo across the shirts in future - we hope.

One can only wish. I still kinda hope our Casumo marshmallow man makes an appearance somewhere. Either one of those inflatable sumo suits as a new mascot or they make some football gifs for use during games.

They were advertising for someone to be a new mascot recently. So your wish may very well be granted...

[Snowflake Royal]

We are just not very organised behind the scenes. I was at the stadium yesterday and a contractor was pulling down the huge Puma logo from the ED stand. We announced the Macron deal in April; and we play Posh in 7 days time

.

Maybe that was the earliest opportunity the club had to do it, taking in:

- availability of contractor/stadium staff
- when the new logo had been made
- council were happy with H&S paperwork

What’s the point of putting a massive sponsorship logo on a stadium 2 months before anyone’s going to see it?

Agree. Baffling criticism. The only reason anyone knows is because an internet no mark posted it on an obscure sub-forum.

[Yellowcoat2]

Maybe even they required planning permission.

[Nameless]

The stadium manager is probably one of the more clued up people at the club. Whatever the reason for the tim8ng of the work it won’t be that he forgot it needed doing.
There’s been a fair bit of work going on at the ground, it might be that for safety reasons they needed to wait until there weren’t other projects going on. Who knows.....