Jump to content
By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans.

Sack Parry.


DanielS

Recommended Posts

There is an article on today's Guardian Unlimited site about United's debt, etc and it has some interesting information on the much vaunted Man Utd commercial interests. The best bits are the following:

 

They promise that the Glazers' United will achieve a better sponsorship deal than the current one recently terminated by Vodafone and secure more profit in a range of activities. They can make the future seem bright. But one of the stubborn Premier League ironies has been that, although the clubs have indeed become huge global names, for all the Far East tie-ups and US tours clubs have found it difficult to turn this worldwide interest in football into cash. Of United's £157m total income last year, just £383,000, 0.24%, was made commercially overseas.

 

Around a third of United's income, £48.4m, came from media rights and £42.4m from commercial activities. The largest earner by far, £66.3m, was made in one nondescript corner of the globe, Stretford, from an old-fashioned activity colloquially known as "going to the match". For all the talk of world markets, as the stadium expands to 75,000 capacity the Glazers' plans rely hugely on demand holding up at Old Trafford.

 

£380,000 from overseas commercial ventures! That last line is key. Football income comes from bums on seats at the stadium and being on the telly. Selling shirts in Miami and Hong Kong brings in peanuts. Investment and new stadium issues aside, does Man Utd's inability to rake in millions, despie their much touted nous, from overseas put to bed the argument that our board aren't exploiting overseas markets enough?

 

Full article here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does 'commercial activities' refer to? Sponsorship?

 

PS

Ban Cisse.

 

I presumed it was sponsorship - would also include advertising revenue for their pitchside boards which would be more than usual because of their non-static nature (something we should be looking at). Either that or Gill putting the housekeeping on Red at the local casino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I presumed it was sponsorship - would also include advertising revenue for their pitchside boards which would be more than usual because of their non-static nature (something we should be looking at).

 

the manc players have complained repeatedly about those flashing electronic pitchside ad hoardings being a distraction and the club has done nothing about them. i find them incredibly irritating just watching a match, so they must be infuriating if you're actually playing. they're horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...