"Now, don't you find your new sponsors paying for that, even a little bit fishy?"
Erm, no. Why do you?
"This sponsorship deal alone, will likely not cover the costs of your players wages and transfer fees over the next ten years."
No sponsorship deal alone would cover the costs of any club's wages and transfer fees. Fortunately, clubs don't have to rely only on sponsorship to cover such costs.
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 1 minute ago
"Now, don't you find your new sponsors paying for that, even a little bit fishy?"
Erm, no. Why do you?
............
Ever so slightly.
...................
Fortunately, clubs don't have to rely only on sponsorship to cover such costs.
........................
I would pretty much say that a vast majority of them do.
Very few of them can rely on TV money and prize money as well as gate receipts.
Look at Chelsea as a prime example of this.
"Ever so slightly."
Why?
"I would pretty much say that a vast majority of them do"
I would say that the vast majority of clubs don't rely on sponsorship alone to cover wages and transfer fees. I would rather say that clubs rely on ALL aspects of revenue (match-day revenue, tv rights, merchandise, sponsorship, etc) in order to cover their expenses. Some clubs (City obviously being one of them) have been fortunate enough to have owners who have been prepared (or rather in a position) to invest in order to improve the club.
Sign in if you want to comment
Naming rights for stadiums
Page 3 of 3
posted on 8/11/11
"Now, don't you find your new sponsors paying for that, even a little bit fishy?"
Erm, no. Why do you?
"This sponsorship deal alone, will likely not cover the costs of your players wages and transfer fees over the next ten years."
No sponsorship deal alone would cover the costs of any club's wages and transfer fees. Fortunately, clubs don't have to rely only on sponsorship to cover such costs.
posted on 8/11/11
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 1 minute ago
"Now, don't you find your new sponsors paying for that, even a little bit fishy?"
Erm, no. Why do you?
............
Ever so slightly.
...................
Fortunately, clubs don't have to rely only on sponsorship to cover such costs.
........................
I would pretty much say that a vast majority of them do.
Very few of them can rely on TV money and prize money as well as gate receipts.
Look at Chelsea as a prime example of this.
posted on 8/11/11
"Ever so slightly."
Why?
"I would pretty much say that a vast majority of them do"
I would say that the vast majority of clubs don't rely on sponsorship alone to cover wages and transfer fees. I would rather say that clubs rely on ALL aspects of revenue (match-day revenue, tv rights, merchandise, sponsorship, etc) in order to cover their expenses. Some clubs (City obviously being one of them) have been fortunate enough to have owners who have been prepared (or rather in a position) to invest in order to improve the club.
Page 3 of 3