Term-X

Fully expecting there to be some pro-Lampard chants at the Bridge later in the month when we play them, it will just go to show how successful he's been at manipulating the fans.
Smart man, I bet he has a good laugh at TOPTB and co cheering his name when he gets back to his mansion with Bleakley.

Try telling that to Francesco Totti, Gerrard.. or even Drogba, you can actually be successful in business and have morals too.

If you're a big club... the two biggest sports brands in European football WILL offer you a contract. Puma would not have even got a meeting with Arsenal!.... if they had kept on winning things with Nike. Same goes for Liverpool and Adidas.
 
 

If you're a big club... the two biggest sports brands in European football WILL offer you a contract. Puma would not have even got a meeting with Arsenal!.... if they had kept on winning things with Nike. Same goes for Liverpool and Adidas.
 
 

As a kid you want the Nike shirts, the Adidas boots Beckham/Messi is wearing, so your mind is already on that brand level. Chelsea not being with one of the big two would be suicide and would scream 'small time'.
The football world knows the cycle..
Arsenal - becomes shit... loses Nike
Liverpool - becomes shit... loses Adidas
 

Image is everything, Chelsea being associated with a status symbol makes us more desirable for incoming fans, and this isn't just for 'selling shirts', I'm referring to all levels. Nike & Adidas are worlds apart from the rest and can market the Chelsea brand the most effectively.

Under Armour have made the ugliest kits in the history of football, Macron actually aren't that bad.. but they scream 'small time'.

The Chelsea brand is only stronger in collaboration with the other big brands. Switching from Adidas or Nike only represents decline in European football. Even if Nike had offered less than UA, we would have made more revenue in the long run with Nike, due to their reach and status.
You're out of your depth discussing a top like this tbh, clearly you no nothing of marketing/brand awareness. 

Nike & Adidas would have matched and double/quadrupled a new contract for Arsenal/Liverpool if they were a club they wanted to be associated with.
How can you not understand this logic?, Puma would NOT be able to offer the same deal to Real Madrid. Same goes for NB and Barcelona.

The kit pitched to the board is similar to the away one here (obviously in home colours). It has the crew neck but it has double piping on the sleeves and also along the bottom of the shirt.
It does look very nice and sleek. 

The Chelsea brand is only stronger in collaboration with the other big brands. Switching from Adidas or Nike only represents decline in European football. Even if Nike had offered less than UA, we would have made more revenue in the long run with Nike, due to their reach and status.
You're out of your depth discussing a top like this tbh, clearly you no nothing of marketing/brand awareness. 

Great news!, maintains the big club image in a time of uncertainty. If Under Armour are going to try and break the Adidas/Nike monopoly in European football they need to start with Bayern, Madrid or Barcelona.

This had to happen.
If we'd have gone with anyone other than Nike, we lose creditability as a brand, in my opinion. Stepping down from Samsung to Yokohama (ignore the monetary aspect - Samsung IS a far bigger brand than Yokohama, at least in the west) was already one big step which could potentially affect our imagine as a titan of world football - to go from adidas to a brand such as Umbro, Under Armor or even Puma would have been another nail in the coffin. The "big" teams in world football - the Madrid clubs, Barcelona, Juventus, the Manchester clubs, the Milan clubs, Bayern Munich, etc. - all maintain reputations as being big clubs, and they have the sponsorship to match it. Yes, there are teams like Arsenal and Dortmund who have Puma, and Liverpool who have New Balance, but adidas and Nike are the big two, and to move from one and not to the other would be a step down on the marketability ladder. 
As of this month, we are the third most marketable team in world football based on shirt sales. Therefore, we are the perfect match for Nike. Especially when you look at our star players - Hazard and Courtois have had glove/boot endorsements with Nike for years - this is the perfect match and re-affirms our brand value. People on here are talking about wanting to flirt with the unknown, and going with up-and-coming brands like Under Armor. No, not a chance. This is about the club generating revenue and it would be a huge gamble to go with a lesser preferred option. I'm all for this, even though I've preferred adidas to Nike my entire life! We have to match the size of the club with a giant of kit manufacturing, and Nike was the only option. This is a chance for Nike to re-establish themselves as a sponsor of European superpowers after losing the likes of Arsenal and United and Juventus in the past couple of seasons. With those teams shifting over to adidas, it leaves Barcelona and Chelsea as THE definitive Nike teams. You'll see our players everywhere (Nike have always advertised more efficiently than adidas have done in the past), and that's a great thing for the Chelsea brand. 
In short: fuck adidas, well done Nike. 
On the subject of this year's shirt - love it. Different to what we've had before. Plus it's blue - and has a Chelsea badge. That'll do for me. But Chelsea are a big brand and now we have another big brand making our kits, I'm excited. Just looking forward to the official confirmation, though it'll probably be announced later in 2016. 

Oh, hell yes!
Term X just jizzed himself!

Chelsea have agreed a stunning £60 million-a-year kit deal with Nike that will help the club to continue to compete at the top end of the transfer market, despite failing to qualify for the Champions League.
Telegraph Sport understands the deal with Nike is worth double to Chelsea than their current £30m-a-year sponsorship deal with Adidas, which the club last week confirmed will come to an end next season.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/05/17/chelsea-sign-60m-a-year-kit-sponsorship-deal-with-nike/

Fair enough but we go on so much about 'big clubs' and what the benchmark ought to be, some fans do take interest in that. And yes the football side is clearly the most important thing, but there's more to a football club than that now. Associating with just giants in their own respective industries only does well to represent the Chelsea brand globally. The bigger we want to become, and thus keep achieving better by enticing world-class players, the more we want our reputation to enhance. 
And again, not saying just because we sign with Nike we'll sign Messi tomorrow (there's always one..) but its something to think about. You shake hands with the right people and they shake hands with better people.. 

You guys can deny it, but Term's right lol. Brand value means a lot more than sometimes who pays the most. It's not like they're giving us peanuts.. I really hope we've got a deal with Nike already and they're just formalising everything.

Switching to ANY other brand other than Nike will symbolise the decline of this club, like leaving Adidas did for liverpool.
As I said, 'marketing 101'/'branding 101', having the status symbol of Nike or Adidas in European football is paramount for our 'top club' image.

In a business sense you are very naive. Marketing/branding is everything, it's what sells, image is paramount.
10 years?, more like 100 years. Nike & Adidas defined cultures, they own european football.

In a business sense you are very naive. Marketing/branding is everything, it's what sells, image is paramount.
10 years?, more like 100 years. Nike & Adidas defined cultures, they own european football.

No, they are not the real deal.. Adidas & Nike are immovable, they are part of the culture of european football. It's an impossible task, and it certainly won't play out like that for Chelsea.
"oh well, it's more money, that's all that matters'' - Marketing is more valuable than getting £20m extra on a contract, for the Chelsea brand to be with anyone other kit manufacturer other than Nike right now is the worst thing that can happen to the clubs image.
 
.....
Man-utd (biggest club in history) - Adidas
Real Madrid (biggest club ever) - Adidas
Barce-fucking-lona - Nike
Bayern-fuckng-Munich (kings of germany - Adidas
Juventus (only club in italy) - Adidas
Man-City - Nike
PSG - Nike
Lionel-fucking-Messi - Adidas
Ronal-fucking-do - Nike
 
 

No, they are not the real deal.. Adidas & Nike are immovable, they are part of the culture of european football. It's an impossible task, and it certainly won't play out like that for Chelsea.
"oh well, it's more money, that's all that matters'' - Marketing is more valuable than getting £20m extra on a contract, for the Chelsea brand to be with anyone other kit manufacturer other than Nike right now is the worst thing that can happen to the clubs image.
 
.....
Man-utd (biggest club in history) - Adidas
Real Madrid (biggest club ever) - Adidas
Barce-fucking-lona - Nike
Bayern-fuckng-Munich (kings of germany - Adidas
Juventus (only club in italy) - Adidas
Man-City - Nike
PSG - Nike
Lionel-fucking-Messi - Adidas
Ronal-fucking-do - Nike
 
 

Switching to ANY other brand other than Nike will symbolise the decline of this club, like leaving Adidas did for liverpool.
As I said, 'marketing 101'/'branding 101', having the status symbol of Nike or Adidas in European football is paramount for our 'top club' image.

Nike or bust, really.

Jesus christ, we're literally following the footsteps of Arsenal & Liverpool when they lost Adidas & Nike. Look around Europe!!... Look!, apart from a freak season it's Nike or Adidas winning the league. BRAND POWER, if your club is aligned with those brands.. you're the elite. When they want you, you're doing something right.
R.I.P Chelsea FC