• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

New Balance kits



Chewbazza

True Believer
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
9,163
Glad that's sorted. I have nothing against NB but Nike could take us to another level in terms of exposure etc.

Just glad we didn't end up back with Adidas. While they had some nice kits, they treated us like shite.

Pressure on now Nike to deliver a kit as nice as the first deep red NB kit.
 



Red Armada

TIA Regular
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
2,924
The chance to become Liverpool's official kit supplier is enough to make major global corporations drool.

New Balance, who has the rights until May next year, have thrown everything at keeping the relationship with Liverpool alive – despite the club being desperate to go with Nike.

The Boston based brand, who has produced Liverpool's playing kit since 2011, put their hopes in a clause in the existing contract that gives them the right to match any offers from a competitor.

Bosses said they have matched every term of the Nike proposals that they are legally compelled to match.

In a bid to force Liverpool to continue their partnership, New Balance filed papers to the High Court and a three day trial ended on Tuesday.

However, when the judgement was delivered this morning, it did not go the way of the current suppliers.

The judge found in favour of the club and dismissed New Balance's case, paving the way for the Reds to seal the deal with Nike.

But some elements of Nike's offer, scrutinised in court this week, may raise questions.

We already know the £30million annual rights fee Nike has proposed to pay Liverpool is considerably less that New Balance's £45million deal.

Nike already has kit with Chelsea and Tottenham involving reported annual fees of £50million, while it pays French giants Paris Saint Germain (PSG) £75million.

Nike has included a promise of 20% royalties on net sales of all LFC goods, and we do not know the ins and outs of its deals with other clubs.

But after the jaw-dropping on-pitch successes of Jurgen Klopp's Reds should be one of the most attractive club's, commercially, in world football.

One exchange in court was an interesting insight into how New Balance saw Nike's offer when it was finally revealed to executives in August.

Under questioning from Daniel Oudkerk, QC, representing New Balance, the firm's Vice President, Chris Davis, told the court he was “very enthusiastic” about matching Nike after seeing their terms.

His enthusiasm was backed up by an internal email sent by a European manager at New Balance in August, saying: “Who knew the only bidders out there would be Nike and they would low-ball it?”

Another point was potentially harmful to New Balance's case, but also raised questions about Nike.

The court heard New Balance's senior sports marketing director, Duncan Thomson, was former Football Association (FA) and England business manager at none other than Nike.

An email from Mr Thomson, to New Balance's global football manager Kenny McCallum, said: “Interesting on distribution….knowing historically how Nike have struggled to deliver that.”

Guy Morpuss, QC, representing Liverpool, suggested that if 6,000 doors was “impossible for Nike to hit, it was impossible for you to hit.”

Mr McCallum responded: “I think my outlook on that would be it’s his (Mr Thomson’s) understanding of the Nike business, that it would be difficult for them to deliver, but I am not entirely sure that reflects on our ability to deliver.”

Another curious detail seized upon by Mr Oudkerk was the fact New Balance's projected kit sales for this season stands at a club record of 2.9million units.

In an exchange with Liverpool's chief commercial officer, Billy Hogan, Mr Oudkerk highlighted the fact that Nike has currently reserved factory capacity to produce 2.9million units for the 2020 season.

In emails between Nike officials and Mr Hogan, the mega-firm had projected sales of around 2.9million doors through 8,000 doors – whereas New Balance's current door count stands at just under 4,000.

Mr Oudkerk put to Mr Hogan that based on that email, Nike were projected to sell the same number of kits through double the number of doors.

Mr Hogan replied: “That’s based on reserved factory capacity, there’s ongoing work at Nike to increase that capacity.”

A strange part of the case emerged when it appeared Liverpool were unaware of a term in the “long-form” Nike offer which stated minimum distribution promised fell away if the club failed to qualify for the Champions League group stages.

Mr Hogan, who admitted he had not read the full contract, said the club had not agreed that in discussions with Nike and it had been included without the knowledge of Liverpool.

All in all, both New Balance and Nike can undoubtedly make Liverpool eye watering piles of cash.

However, as reported last month, both offers seem to be a significant distance away from Adidas's deal with Manchester United - at least in terms of annual bottom line payment.

The Mirror reports United have signed a £75million per year deal, which started in 2014 and is due to expire in 2024.

After the uncomfortable and public scrutiny involved a court case, some fans may well be left wondering if Nike have offered the best possible terms for a club at the peak of its marketing powers.


After everything that's happened, it's a massive failure if the bolded is true. Not to mention the fact of Nike inserting clauses in the contract without LFC's knowledge or Hogan's admittance that he hadn't read the entire contract.

This deal is too big to mess it up.
 

Red Armada

TIA Regular
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
2,924
One question though, didn't the dude who did the Utd deal get the arse straight away because it was so fucking absurd??
No idea, but the article states that Nike is already paying PSG 75mil a year. So even if that was the case with United's deal, it doesn't seem that outlandish for Liverpool anymore, particularly if we take into account that we are the reigning European Champions.
 

SBYM

La presión es para neumáticos
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
7,422
Rideo, I'm sure someone on here will know.

PSG?

Minnows...
 



Hope in your heart

Loyalty and patience, two undervalued concepts.
Admin
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
22,975
So the big bad corporation gets what it wants in the end... Hopefully the terms of that deal are really much, much better than the one LFC would have got from NB. I have nagging doubts about it. PSG get 75m from their current shirt deal with Nike, LFC will get 30m. So, will LFC get the difference through shirt sales? Hopefully so, but... isn't it strange how NB thought internally that they had a real chance to match Nike's offer, and they thought that Nike was lowballing their offer?

I don't know... I wouldn't put it past Nike to try to corrupt people at LFC to get them an advantageous deal signed. For them, not for LFC. Hogan's role in all this doesn't seem very clear.

Let's see how it pans out economically for the club, hopefully it will be a good deal. But as I've written earlier, I won't buy any shirt with that logo. Nike have been known since decades to ruthlessly exploit economically fragile people in third world countries through their subcontractors, including children, and for all those who might think that this is an old story and doesn't hold any truth anymore, have a look at this article, it dates from 2018:


Here a telling excerpt:

However, a June report from the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) alleged that factory workers today receive even less of Nike profits than they did in the 1990s.

"The share of production costs of Nike and Adidas shoes that ends up in a worker's pocket is now a staggering 30 percent less than in the early 1990s (2.5 percent in 2017 for Nike shoes compared with 4 percent in 1995)," the organization said, Reuters reported. According to CCC, the company has transferred much of its manufacturing to Indonesia, Cambodia and Vietnam as wages have increased in China.



That being said, I don't think that Adidas or Puma are better in that regard, and I've honestly no idea how NB operate. But Nike remain a bit of a symbol for this new form of slavery which has flourished over the two decades, so as far as I'm concerned, I'm not too happy about the association between LFC and these neo-slavers.

As for those imagining any link with Mbappe because of this deal, stop dreaming please. Nothing has changed in that regard. Klopp is a tight Schwarzwälder and the one to call the shots regarding transfers. fsg aren't known for throwing money out of the window either (that's why there is such a brilliant understanding between them and Klopp). This won't change because Nike are in. Mbappe would cost at least 200m in the current player market. In short, forget it.

Anyway... people will probably tell me that I'm a grumpy nostalgic without any understanding of the world we live in. Or something like that...
 

nikz200

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
997
Personally I'm glad it is done with and now we can move forward and focus. Nike has questionable business practices sure, and there is tons of things we can think about when it comes to them. But in the end, whats the right move for the team? Adidas has made Man Utd a global brand and in that sense we are late to that particular party. The collaboration oppurtunties with the biggest icons like Lebron, Serena and Drake even means we are on a platform made to last for a long time. Plus the jerseys will finally be more accessible in Asia. I will no longer have to think about where the NB stores are located, i can just walk into any mall here and find nike immediately.

Plus it sets up well. Adidas has helped united sign pogba and players like that by just making connections through brand presence. At least now on the Nike side we can make connections through to players under their banner.
Plus the following clubs are under Nike
  • Chelsea
  • Manchester City
  • Tottenham Hotspur
  • PSG
  • RB Leipzig
  • Wolfsburg
  • Inter Milan
  • AS Roma
  • Atlético Madrid
  • Barcelona
  • Sevilla f Thats not bad at all in terms of company we will be keeping, whereas NB was Porto and Celtic and athletic bilbao.......

In the end NB to me just didn't do enough and even here they just tried to match the money without promising anything from us blaming us for their lack of ability to market us to China....... because before this we weren't "winning".
 



Livvy

Alles wird gut
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
6,457
Personally I'm glad it is done with and now we can move forward and focus. Nike has questionable business practices sure, and there is tons of things we can think about when it comes to them. But in the end, whats the right move for the team? Adidas has made Man Utd a global brand and in that sense we are late to that particular party. The collaboration oppurtunties with the biggest icons like Lebron, Serena and Drake even means we are on a platform made to last for a long time. Plus the jerseys will finally be more accessible in Asia. I will no longer have to think about where the NB stores are located, i can just walk into any mall here and find nike immediately.

Plus it sets up well. Adidas has helped united sign pogba and players like that by just making connections through brand presence. At least now on the Nike side we can make connections through to players under their banner.
Plus the following clubs are under Nike
  • Chelsea
  • Manchester City
  • Tottenham Hotspur
  • PSG
  • RB Leipzig
  • Wolfsburg
  • Inter Milan
  • AS Roma
  • Atlético Madrid
  • Barcelona
  • Sevilla f Thats not bad at all in terms of company we will be keeping, whereas NB was Porto and Celtic and athletic bilbao.......

In the end NB to me just didn't do enough and even here they just tried to match the money without promising anything from us blaming us for their lack of ability to market us to China....... because before this we weren't "winning".
Manchester City changed to Puma.

 
Last edited:

Red_Jedi

Anfield kick about
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
1,760
2.9 units at £60 equals £174 Million.
20% of that figure will be £34.8 Million.
Totaling with the base line figure is £64.8.

Better than the current deal but I'd expect a price increase on all kits and training wear.
From my understanding, 2.9m units is only shirt sales. Nike have that reserved at factory level, and will increase if necessary - much quicker than NB could do.

I can see 3.5m shirt sales in Nike first season.

Then add all the other stuff - training kits, shorts, socks etc - and I reckon we could be above £80m per season.

In both parties interests to increase sales.

NB shirts have been great, but I’ve not been impressed with their distribution - loads of kits sold out early and take ages to get restocked.

Less of this type of issue with Nike.
 
Last edited:

Scott Jones

Blunt
Ad-free Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
15,577
Manchester City changed to Puma.

Wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that the citeh owners own some of Puma so overpaying,not sure how many shirts citeh sell anyway,maybe citeh owners buy most of them to bend the amount sold to fans.
 

Dutch

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
1,674
I fully trust the people who are in charge that they have done the math and that the Nike deal is a great one for us.
 



The Elusive 19th

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
4,814
From my understanding, 2.9m units is only shirt sales. Nike have that reserved at factory level, and will increase if necessary - much quicker than NB could do.

I can see 3.5b shirt sales in Nike first season.

Then add all the other stuff - training kits, shorts, socks etc - and I reckon we could be above £80m per season.

In both parties interests to increase sales.

NB shirts have been great, but I’ve not been impressed with their distribution - loads of kits sold out early and take ages to get restocked.

Less of this type of issue with Nike.
If Nike LFC shirt sale indeed jump from 2.9m to 3.5b in first season, then NB should just sell their org and move on.
 

SirBillShankly

Joe and Holly's Dad
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
10,202
Happy with this deal. £30m seems a bit low considering we are currently the world's best team/ European Champions. If it helps us to sign Mbappe then it has to be good news doesn't it?
 
Last edited:

RedYank

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2018
Messages
745
So the big bad corporation gets what it wants in the end... Hopefully the terms of that deal are really much, much better than the one LFC would have got from NB. I have nagging doubts about it. PSG get 75m from their current shirt deal with Nike, LFC will get 30m. So, will LFC get the difference through shirt sales? Hopefully so, but... isn't it strange how NB thought internally that they had a real chance to match Nike's offer, and they thought that Nike was lowballing their offer?

I don't know... I wouldn't put it past Nike to try to corrupt people at LFC to get them an advantageous deal signed. For them, not for LFC. Hogan's role in all this doesn't seem very clear.

Let's see how it pans out economically for the club, hopefully it will be a good deal. But as I've written earlier, I won't buy any shirt with that logo. Nike have been known since decades to ruthlessly exploit economically fragile people in third world countries through their subcontractors, including children, and for all those who might think that this is an old story and doesn't hold any truth anymore, have a look at this article, it dates from 2018:


Here a telling excerpt:

However, a June report from the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) alleged that factory workers today receive even less of Nike profits than they did in the 1990s.

"The share of production costs of Nike and Adidas shoes that ends up in a worker's pocket is now a staggering 30 percent less than in the early 1990s (2.5 percent in 2017 for Nike shoes compared with 4 percent in 1995)," the organization said, Reuters reported. According to CCC, the company has transferred much of its manufacturing to Indonesia, Cambodia and Vietnam as wages have increased in China.



That being said, I don't think that Adidas or Puma are better in that regard, and I've honestly no idea how NB operate. But Nike remain a bit of a symbol for this new form of slavery which has flourished over the two decades, so as far as I'm concerned, I'm not too happy about the association between LFC and these neo-slavers.

As for those imagining any link with Mbappe because of this deal, stop dreaming please. Nothing has changed in that regard. Klopp is a tight Schwarzwälder and the one to call the shots regarding transfers. fsg aren't known for throwing money out of the window either (that's why there is such a brilliant understanding between them and Klopp). This won't change because Nike are in. Mbappe would cost at least 200m in the current player market. In short, forget it.

Anyway... people will probably tell me that I'm a grumpy nostalgic without any understanding of the world we live in. Or something like that...
This was the sentiment I was mentioning in reference to personal loathing of Nike. Without having to go Away End! ;)
 

CymruRed

TIA Youth Team
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
1,039
2.9 units at £60 equals £174 Million.
20% of that figure will be £34.8 Million.
Totaling with the base line figure is £64.8.

Better than the current deal but I'd expect a price increase on all kits and training wear.
The 20% part of the deal is for LFC merchandise/clothing or anything with an LFC logo on it (which i'd imagine will be quite alot,seeing as Nike can make/distribute and sell on a massive scale globally),ontop of the basic £30mill yearly payment,i'm not sure what the deal is with the actual kit sales but i'd imagine we'd have more money again for selling X amount of extra replica shirts aswell.

I wouldn't be suprised if the deal over all could net us well over £80/90mill+ a season and i'd imagine PSG's £75mill a year is for shirts AND merchandise,all in.

I just hope they take a leaf out of NB's book and make our kits unique to us with some thought and style thrown in aswell,not just some generic shirt but in red for us.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,675
Like I said before, LFC probably have an idea on using the Nike deal, and access to the likes of LeBron and Drake, to lift the club into the realm of an iconic brand. They see that as being worth much more than the £30m upfront.
 



Nikola

"Oh, history writer, don't close the pages yet!"
Admin
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
18,560
Like I said before, LFC probably have an idea on using the Nike deal, and access to the likes of LeBron and Drake, to lift the club into the realm of an iconic brand. They see that as being worth much more than the £30m upfront.
This. With all due respect to New Balance, they were to Liverpool what Liverpool were to Suarez, a rather convenient stepping stone on the road to fulfilling ambition, being there at the right place at the right time and doing pretty well, all things considered. In this particular case, both parties seem to be coming out as winners - New Balance made the kit in which Champions League was won, raising their image in the process, while Liverpool gained a significant financial reward and then signed with one of the two biggest kit manufacturers in the world.

I can't remember the source, maybe it was The Athletic or that analyst who closely followed the court proceedings against New Balance and posted certain calculations/observations on Twitter that were shared here - anyway, it was claimed that Liverpool actually got something close to 70 million pounds because of the record kit sales after winning CL. I was a bit surprised by the ostensibly low numbers when I learned of the Nike deal but coming to think more about it, I realised that Liverpool probably sacrificed a bit of short-term financial gain in order to gain foothold in China and USA markets in the long term.

Hopefully the club will achieve on-the-pitch success that is needed to sway the new generations of supporters, generate income needed to close the gap on Manchester clubs, Real Madrid and Barcelona and truly raise the club level to that of a global superpower. I'm not too big on these influencers stuff, especially as I'm not fond of hip-hop, but whatever floats their boat. Social networks, digital transformation and all that.
 

Billy Biskix

TIA Youth Team
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2011
Messages
2,799
JK and the boys have done their bit on the pitch now it's time for FSG to do their bit off the pitch and start closing the commercial gap. The new kit deal is the first big opportunity to do that. There were aspects of this trial that didn't read very well for us. The fact that we're in court at all. The lack of specifics around what the matching clause really meant. If the judge really did decide the case on the basis of Nike's 'influencers' then we were lucky. That's not really a quantifiable element of any deal and there are some big assumptions being made there about the impact on sales. Lebron James is already an LFC influencer because he part owns the club and, ultimately, it's success on the pitch that will determine how keen people are to wear LFC gear. Also, a bit embarrassing that our Commercial Director, Billy Hogan, didn't know what was in the Nike contract because he hadn't read it. If that was Ian Ayre he'd have been slaughtered.

On the deal itself it's hard to judge as it's been set up in such a novel way and it's obviously heavily dependent on sales. It is difficult to get any reliable estimates of how many shirts we currently sell, based on my extensive googling, but whatever figures are out there are well short of 2.9 million and thinking about it logically that is a mind-bogglingly large number of sales.