Spike 12,049 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Reminds me of HSV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted January 13, 2015 Author Share Posted January 13, 2015 Reminds me of HSV.You remind me of HIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 You remind me of HIVDo I get under your skin? Because I want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachikethas 1,154 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 wow never heard of this company before. i still hope Samsung to renew the contract! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted January 13, 2015 Author Share Posted January 13, 2015 wow never heard of this company before. i still hope Samsung to renew the contract!I heard it's Chelsea that don't want Samsung rather than vice versa.I'm not sure why, I imagine they wasn't offering enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strong centreback 157 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 id of thought that it would boil down to money, samsung arnt in as strong a financial position as they have been in the past and so wouldnt be looking at a vast increase in the amount they paid us, especially as their profile is 5 fold what it was when we first had them on the shirt, so id of thought at a current rate of £18m a year they wouldnt of wanted much more than a 25% hike whereas the club should be aiming for a minimum of a 100% hike to £36m considering the other deals that have been signed by other clubs, id also if I were the club only want to be signed up for 5 years, a 10 year deal can put you behind rivals who only lock them selves in for shorter periods like real madrid or bayern for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 id of thought that it would boil down to money, samsung arnt in as strong a financial position as they have been in the past and so wouldnt be looking at a vast increase in the amount they paid us, especially as their profile is 5 fold what it was when we first had them on the shirt, so id of thought at a current rate of £18m a year they wouldnt of wanted much more than a 25% hike whereas the club should be aiming for a minimum of a 100% hike to £36m considering the other deals that have been signed by other clubs, id also if I were the club only want to be signed up for 5 years, a 10 year deal can put you behind rivals who only lock them selves in for shorter periods like real madrid or bayern for example.I doubt it's anything to do with finances. Their revenue is $327 billion it's less than 0.001% of their revenue.This is the strongest they've ever been in terms of revenue. They are the leaders in the smartphone sector and are expecting huge profits from recent investments in pharmaceuticals. You know when a companies sponsor horizon goes from Chelsea to Swindon Town that they absolutely love putting their name on anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I doubt it's anything to do with finances. Their revenue is $327 billion it's less than 0.001% of their revenue.This is the strongest they've ever been in terms of revenue. They are the leaders in the smartphone sector and are expecting huge profits from recent investments in pharmaceuticals. You know when a companies sponsor horizon goes from Chelsea to Swindon Town that they absolutely love putting their name on anything.They probably think they have the bargaining power as well. Chelsea's lack of revenue from limited seating at SB places us in a position where negotiations with sponsors is difficult. We can't exactly say 'well we can do better without your contributions'. It's hard to start a bidding war with sponsors when you don't make much anyway. Samsung probably took it for granted and pissed Chelsea off lmao. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Term-X 7,891 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Post removed, let's not try and incite a flame war with political comments like that.Alex. Edited January 14, 2015 by Alex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosnian Blue 2,471 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 who ever offers more can have their name on the shirt as far as I'm concerned, this is the way business works nowadays Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 who ever offers more can have their name on the shirt as far as I'm concerned, this is the way business works nowadaysTrue, but I'm glad there's certain rules on who can be a sponsor. Like tobacco companies are banned, I'm a strong believer in banning loan shark companies like Wonga etc.. But that's down to personal preferences and like you said - It's just business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekid9 418 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Anyone notice the shirt Ipswich are playing in right now? Exactly the same as the supposed new shirt we have! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topico 165 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 Read the thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekid9 418 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Read the thread...Certainly hope it's not the Ipswich template....the one with red is much nicer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nadavTKL 1,787 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Mail reports it now.. "Turkish Airlines are still at the table but are believed to be cautious about paying that sky-high price" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueChelseaBlue 105 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Mail reports it now.. "Turkish Airlines are still at the table but are believed to be cautious about paying that sky-high price"Bit slow aren't they? tut tut... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted January 15, 2015 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-2910659/Chelsea-s-25m-year-shirt-deal-Turkish-Airlines-stalls-sky-high-price.htmlWhat a bullshit article More like Chelsea stall at Turkish Airlines pathetic price..."Turkish Airlines are still at the table"....Errr no, so you've said they're not sponsoring Chesea, but they might still sponsor Chelsea and haven't reported on anyone else "at the table"....You're guessing Daily Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supporter 3,088 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 It is a joke that Manchester United win every year £ 53 millions! (€ 68.36 million!) And Turkish Airlines (or any other company) just offers us £ 25 million (€ 32.25 million) for sponsoring our shirt. We can not accept such a ridiculous offer, it's embarrassing, we must demand an offer according to our level and history.I hope we finally get a rational sponsorship. This is a matter of respect. We are no less important than Manchester United.Respect for us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 This is a matter of respect. We are no less important than Manchester United.As I mentioned before, it's not that simple. United have one of the largest stadiums in England, their global brand is probably the biggest in English football and so they're a sponsor's ideal club. Their following is massive where ever you go and their shirt sales probably outdo most clubs in Europe (bar the obvious giants).We're in a very limited position. Our commercial revenue only increases due to TV deals and our stadium revenue barely go up by 0.5% a year due to the limited capacity of our stadium. While our global reach continues to grow in Asia and Africa, we're still behind most giant clubs. In that sense, we need sponsorship more than they need us. That's why for now we have to accept such low offers behind the likes of United & City.. We're doing better than Liverpool which does actually speak volumes considering their global brand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.