New Kit

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss the latest matches, our players and any transfer news surrounding Spurs. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Register to remove


Why Tottenham’s kit deal is worth a lot less than Big Six rivals
29 March 2019 11:42 AM
Photo: Getty Images
Daniel Levy calls for realism when comparing Spurs’ sponsorship deals with Big Six rivals.
Offthepitch.com can exclusively reveal how many shirts Tottenham sold per year in average.
Manchester City also struggling in shirt sales compared to rivals at the top of the Premier League.

ALEX MILLER contact@offthepitch.com

Tottenham have admitted their extended kit deal with Nike - worth £30 million a year - is worth less than the other ‘Big Six’ Premier League clubs because they don’t sell as many kits.
The 15-year extension to their kit supply deal with the US-based sports apparel giant was reportedly worth £450 million when it was announced in October.
However, this is less than half the value of the most lucrative deal - Manchester United’s £75 million a year deal with Adidas.
Speaking at a recent Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust meeting, club officials admitted their deal reflected the number of shirts the club is able to shift.
‘BIG SIX’ PREMIER LEAGUE KIT DEALS - PER YEAR
  • Manchester UnitedAdidas£75m
  • Manchester CityPuma£65m
  • ArsenalAdidas£60m
  • ChelseaAdidas£60m
  • LiverpoolNew Balance£45m
  • TottenhamNike£30m

Confidential agreement
The club admitted their shirt sales were below those at their main domestic rivals, including Manchester United, Liverpool, Woolwich and Chelsea.
Spurs chairman Daniel Levy told the meeting: “Realism was needed, other clubs sell more shirts than Tottenham, which has an impact on the fee.”
Simon Bamber, a club director added that deal values reported in the press were usually inaccurate, with some clubs including potential bonus amounts in their headline figures.
A spokesman for the club told offthepitch.com: “This is a confidential agreement and therefore we wouldn’t be able to provide any details.”
Only sold 268,000 shirts
However, an authoritative new research into Premier League shirt sales by industry insider Dr Peter Rohlmann and his team at the consulting bureau, PR Marketing, confirmed Tottenham’s position in relation to shirt sales.
The White Hart lane club sold an average of 268,000 shirts per year in the four-season period from 2014-15 to 2017-18 inclusive, offthepitch.com can exclusively reveal.
By comparison, Manchester United topped the popularity stakes, having sold an average of more than 1,862,500 shirts each season during the four years, with Liverpool second selling an average of 1,050,000 shirts per year.
The two giants are the only English clubs to shift seven-figure volumes every year.


United and Liverpool remain the two most popular clubs globally in English football, and the United-Liverpool fixture remains the biggest global draw in the Premier League calendar, in terms of global audience figures.
Woolwich were the third most popular club, selling 875,000 shirts per season, ahead of Chelsea. The Stamford Bridge club shifted an average of 787,500 shirts a year during this four-year period.
Revenues tend to be split
Manchester City sold significantly fewer shirts in fifth spot, shifting an average of 342,000 a year. It is worth noting that City’s new £65 million a year kit deal with Puma also covers sister clubs in Australia, Spain, Uruguay and China.
Spurs stadium repayments is almost £50 million a year – but the increase in matchday income is even bigger
25 March 2019 7:55 AM

Revenues tend to be split between manufacturers and clubs, with the kit makers raking in the lion’s share. Levy told the THST meeting that it was difficult to compare Tottenham’s kit deal to some of their rivals, as some of them had also sold their merchandising rights, while Spurs prefer to keep hold of theirs.
North London rivals Woolwich are set to begin a kit deal with Adidas in the summer worth a reported £60 million a year.

Nike agreed a £900 million deal with Chelsea that also spans 15 years, which also works out at £60 million per year.
In recent months, Tottenham have also announced a number of new brand partnership deals with Audi, IWC Schaffhausen, HPE and EA SPORTS.
The length of the new Nike contract does provide Tottenham with a level of cash flow certainty at a time when the club will have to service cash outflows relating to the new £1 billion stadium.
A club statement on the financial situation at the club recently revealed: “The residual amount of gross debt to be converted or extinguished will depend on a number of factors including several commercial discussions.”
I wonder if they'd sell more if it didn't have a RED sponsor?

Or does the money from AIA cover that?
We're NEVER gonna have as many fans GLOBALLY as Man Utd/Liverpool (which is where, I assume the bulk of replica shirts are sold?)
I don't even know why the article exists... it's hardly a ground-breaking revelation !
 
Comment

CSWY

Supporter
Away shirt this year and last season’s third are the only Nike ones I’ve liked. Home shirts have all been an abomination. Cheap fit and horrible features. It’s always going to look quite poor with the red AIA logo but fucking hell they’ve done well to make them worse than UA.
 
Comment

Darnswim

Bill Nicholson. Mauricio Pochettino.
Away shirt this year and last season’s third are the only Nike ones I’ve liked. Home shirts have all been an abomination. Cheap fit and horrible features. It’s always going to look quite poor with the red AIA logo but fucking hell they’ve done well to make them worse than UA.
UA had some very good kits though? The one with the HP is an absolute classic, and so is the 2017 one, even though AIA ruins it a bit.
 
Comment

Register to remove

I quite like the look of this year's 3rd that I purchased. I was OK with the design of this year's home until I saw it in person and on the players. Looks really poor for some reason despite the simplicity (which I generally like). The away this year is just really bland.
 
Comment

CSWY

Supporter
I quite like the look of this year's 3rd that I purchased. I was OK with the design of this year's home until I saw it in person and on the players. Looks really poor for some reason despite the simplicity (which I generally like). The away this year is just really bland.
It’s the collar and then the overall quality and fit. Just really cheap and minging. Fortunately the club have just brought out some very decent retro shirts.

 
Comment
Is anybody as pissed off as me, at the quality of the ‘replica’ shirts since Nike took over. Replica shirts were always pretty much identical to the actual shirts, whereas now we’re having to pay £90 for the elite shirt to have a bit of pattern in the material. Think it’s bollocks! (Still keep buying the fucking things though)
 
Comment
Is anybody as pissed off as me, at the quality of the ‘replica’ shirts since Nike took over. Replica shirts were always pretty much identical to the actual shirts, whereas now we’re having to pay £90 for the elite shirt to have a bit of pattern in the material. Think it’s bollocks! (Still keep buying the fucking things though)
Puma and Under Armour did exactly the same. The player version just wasn’t as widely available as it is with Nike, so most people (i.e. you, apparently) didn’t notice
 
Comment
I wonder if they'd sell more if it didn't have a RED sponsor?

Or does the money from AIA cover that?
We're NEVER gonna have as many fans GLOBALLY as Man Utd/Liverpool (which is where, I assume the bulk of replica shirts are sold?)
I don't even know why the article exists... it's hardly a ground-breaking revelation !
I think there's only a small percentage of fans that are sad enough to not buy their clubs shirt JUST because the sponsor is red. They need help tbh.
The truth of the matter is we fell behind in overseas popularity in the mediocre 90's - just as the PL absolutely skyrocketted in popularity. The likes of Manure and Arseholes totally took advantage and gained huge overseas support. Frustratingly, Liverpool managed to live off their 70's and 80's success, a champions league win etc kept them ticking over and Chelsea entered the fray in the early 00's by getting Mourinho and all the bluechip signings.

We have just had to watch on as these teams all hit the big time.
Man City are the new Chelsea, in 10 years time they'll have an army of fans that began watching them when they were founded in 2008 and their shirt sales will ramp up.

And we'll still be behind.

Going Nike was a disaster, you can't get Spurs shirts in the Nike store. Only Chavs and Barca.
Depends what Nike store you go in. It only hurts Nike if they don't sell the shirts. Spurs get their £30m a year regardless.

Away shirt this year and last season’s third are the only Nike ones I’ve liked. Home shirts have all been an abomination. Cheap fit and horrible features. It’s always going to look quite poor with the red AIA logo but fucking hell they’ve done well to make them worse than UA.
Elite shirts are nicer but the price is robbery. I got last seasons elite away shirt around about this time last year for £52 though
 
Comment

Register to remove

Top Bottom