Chang Extension

[dannyboy]

Think this is pretty ok deal. Stability in that area is good i quess. Could have been better... or worse

Chang it is.

I'd change our sponsor every year for more money.

It's incredible to see how far we've fell from grace since the inception of the Premier League. We really are all resigned to being also rans. There's been such an unbelievable amount of mismanagement, and these kind of deals have been a big part of the problem since 1992.

 

[RaleighBlue]

how do you know they didn't?

But this is the crux of it: If they did, and 5 million with Chang is the best deal, then they are bad at their jobs.

Sunderland and Fulham are on 5 million a season. If Everton legitimately cannot do better than Sunderland and Fulham, then the businessmen are bad at their jobs. If they can, and didn't, then they are bad at their jobs.

 

[davek]

I cant wait for Elstone's next commercial coup: Everton Ukrainian soccer camps in Crimea.

The useless nobhead.

 

[BlueLlama]

The elephants look nice on the shirt though

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

If Everton legitimately cannot do better than Sunderland and Fulham, then the businessmen are bad at their jobs.

but ARE we in any better position than Sunderland or Fulham when it comes to sponsorship?
Don't think there'll be much in it fanbase/exposure wise (with an objective/non-fan head on) which is all potential sponsors will be looking at.

 

[Herk8346]

Ok so people saying how poor the deal is

There's only 6 clubs who get more in sponsor money, Thats the top 4 Utd and Spurs

Hardly a shock that the teams based in London and Utd/Liverpool get the most money (Around 20m a season)

We are on par with Newcastle,Villa,Fulham,Sunderland money wise getting around 5m a season

Then there is the bottom end of the table with the likes of West Ham,West Brom,Norwich etc getting around 1.5m a season

Why do people think we should be getting more? We have not been in Europe for a while, Have not one anything in 20 years and do not have a massive fan base

Sums it up really, people will complain but its not that bad a deal, would of liked 7+ a season, but until we get back into Europe and become more successful it will keep staying around the same level of Newcastle Villa etc

 

[RaleighBlue]

but ARE we in any better position than Sunderland or Fulham when it comes to sponsorship?
Don't think there'll be much in it fanbase/exposure wise (with an objective/non-fan head on) which is all potential sponsors will be looking at.

I would say yes, mainly because we're less of a relegation risk year to year. Sunderland got that deal when facist Di Canio was the manager...Fulham have almost no fans.

So what does Everton get you? A near guarantee of at least 10 games a season against Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, and United. Sunderland and Fulham don't give you that. And a much higher likelihood of European football.

Even if 10 is a stretch, I still say we should be on par with Newcastle (6 million) or above them.

 

[Everton Bulgaria]

Everton needs MASSIVE investment !

 

[GraemeS1980]

They could pay us ten bob a season and have bell whiff written across the front of the shirts I personally am not bothered as long as they wear the royal blue and win one of them shiny things which is what the game is all about. It shows the state of the game when there are at least three maybe four threads going on a fans site all to do with sponsorship.

Bring back the days of talking about tactics and how many are we going to score this week, or just something normal instead of this money, corporate BS all the while.

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

I would say yes, mainly because we're less of a relegation risk year to year. Sunderland got that deal when facist Di Canio was the manager...Fulham have almost no fans.

So what does Everton get you? A near guarantee of at least 10 games a season against Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, and United. Sunderland and Fulham don't give you that. And a much higher likelihood of European football.

Even if 10 is a stretch, I still say we should be on par with Newcastle (6 million) or above them.

Newcastle has a much bigger fanbase as it's a one team area, same could possibly said of Sunderland to a lesser extent. Fulham are based in London, whenever they play another London club chances are it will be televised as a Derby. We can occasionally get European Football, but then again so did Fulham in the period of the numbers I gave.
Match of the Day running order might even be a reliable indicator to the 'pulling power' sponsorship-wise of a club. It's not necessary about the the success of the club (though that helps) it's about exposure and how fashionable the club is. We are more fashionable than the likes of Stoke, Villa, Swansea etc and we are becoming more fashionable under the current Manager and we're already starting to see us getting more press exposure, but it takes a long time to change perceptions.

They aren't buying their names on our shirts, they are buying our Everton sex to shift more units. Nothing else matters to them. That puts the value on it.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I would say yes, mainly because we're less of a relegation risk year to year. Sunderland got that deal when facist Di Canio was the manager...Fulham have almost no fans.

So what does Everton get you? A near guarantee of at least 10 games a season against Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, and United. Sunderland and Fulham don't give you that. And a much higher likelihood of European football.

Even if 10 is a stretch, I still say we should be on par with Newcastle (6 million) or above them.

Actually we manage an average of about 14 games live a year, same a Newcastle, Villa, Sunderland and Fulham. Spurs and the rest of the clubs getting more money than us get well into the mid 20's. Is there a coincidence we all get roughly the same income and those who appear more as live games get sponsorship revenue?

It's not difficult to we the link.

 

[RaleighBlue]

Actually we manage an average of about 14 games live a year, same a Newcastle, Villa, Sunderland and Fulham. Spurs and the rest of the clubs getting more money than us get well into the mid 20's. Is there a coincidence we all get roughly the same income and those who appear more as live games get sponsorship revenue?

It's not difficult to we the link.

Think Sunderland and Fulham will be televised 14 times next year if they get relegated?

A 3 year contract should be forward thinking, not focused on the current state. We should not be making the same amount as a team that may get relegated as we are less of a risk for the investment.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Think Sunderland and Fulham will be televised 14 times next year if they get relegated?

A 3 year contract should be forward thinking, not focused on the current state. We should not be making the same amount as a team that may get relegated as we are less of a risk for the investment.

Do you not think there will be clauses inserted that reduce there sponsorship revenue if this happens??

 

[RaleighBlue]

Do you not think there will be clauses inserted that reduce there sponsorship revenue if this happens??

Of course there are.

SL, actually made a point not far off from mine earlier

It's about exposure and how fashionable the club is. We are more fashionable than the likes of Stoke, Villa, Swansea etc and we are becoming more fashionable under the current Manager and we're already starting to see us getting more press exposure, but it takes a long time to change perceptions.

They aren't buying their names on our shirts, they are buying our Everton sex to shift more units. Nothing else matters to them. That puts the value on it.

My point is that we should be more fashionable than Sunderland and Fulham and Newcastle, simply by virtue of success on the pitch. The fact we are not more fashionable than these other teams (assuming we're not as this is the best deal we can get) should be chalked up to poor marketing. We can lay some of that blame at the feet of David Moyes, but I think a larger portion of that blame can be apportioned to culture that seems to consider Everton a plucky little club. The media treats us this way because we treat ourselves this way, and therefore sponsors see us that way. This is a cultural problem in the attitude of the club that needs to change. Roberto is certainly seeing to his side of that.

If the above is wrong and we are more fashionable than those other clubs, then the blame can still be laid at the business side because we didn't get the deal we could have.

I'm not necessarily saying we could get more than Newcastle given our current state. I'm saying that if we cannot, then there is a failure on the part of Everton in selling their brand.

 

[artetas_biggest_fan]

I quoted Valencia because someone mentioned them in an earlier post, and I agree they are a bad example, like most European clubs apart from the top few, when compared with the Premier League. In fact a few years ago a lot of clubs from the top Spanish League were unable to attract shirt sponsors at all, and the current state of the Spanish economy probably means that their situation has not got any better.The Premier League, and Europe, regularly, are the places to be, particularly if youre winning .

I mentioned Valencia not to compare income with PL teams, rather as an example of the gulf between the elite teams (in Spain's case, Real and Barça) and the rest. There is a huge drop off from the top 5/6 in England and the rest...so just because you finish 6th/7th doesn't mean your earnings are close to the team in 5th. Unfortunately serial moaner and bill basher davek doesn't quite grasp this reality.