Barclays Premier League

[Subject Delta]

So basically because he owns the club and can delay or reduce repayments at his whim, they are at no real risk? Clever

[Rappy Veteran]

Manchester United get new Sponsor

Manchester United will announce the most lucrative shirt sponsorship deal in football history in the next few hours after agreeing an ?80million partnership with Aon Corp, the American financial giant.

Current sponsors AIG, the American insurance firm, said in January that it would not be renewing its ?14m-per-year contract after it suffered massive losses during the global economic downturn.

United always maintained they were confident of securing an improved deal when their current contract ends in May 2010 and The Wall Street Journal claim the contract with Aon is worth ?20m per year over four seasons.

AIG will continue to have its name on the club's shirts next season, before the Chicago-based financial services company take over the sponsorship in June 2010.

A number of companies had been linked with the United shirt deal, including electronics giants Samsung and Saudi Telecom and Indian firms Sahara and Tata.

However, Aon now appear to have agreed one of the most prestigious advertising deals in sport.

Top shirt sponsorship deals

1. Bayern Munich (T-Home) ?17.03m per year

2. Real Madrid (Bwin) ?12.78m

3. Chelsea (Samsung Mobile) ?10.73m

4=. Schalke '04 (Gazprom) ?10.22m

AC Milan (Bwin) ?10.22m (Telegraph[/b]raph)

[Kralik]

Heres an interesting poll btw.. most(62%) of the people feel Ancelloti will fail at Chelsea..

[Rappy Veteran]

I think I am upset at West Ham's away kit

[Kralik]

I think I am upset at West Ham's away kit]

Nice!! :yes: What makes you upset abt it Rappy? Its a nice colour.. the strip in the middle looks great.. collar is nice too.. Now that Chelsea and Barca's greenish/yellowish type shirt.. that was disgustingly annoying.. also our blue away kit was so-so IMO.. we have a better away kit this coming season too..

[deuz]

man thats a fugly kit, looks like a school kit...sorry rappy :p

[Rappy Veteran]

man thats a fugly kit, looks like a school kit...sorry rappy :p

Nah that's cool I hate it as well :p

[gregb0b]

I like it :]. I totally forgot that the same person who co-owns liverpool owns the new england patriots and the montreal canadiens hmmm and the family that owns the tampa bay bucs owns man utd i live in tampa ^_^

[Subject Delta]

I like it :]. I totally forgot that the same person who co-owns liverpool owns the new england patriots and the montreal canadiens hmmm and the family that owns the tampa bay bucs owns man utd i live in tampa ^_^

No wonder they keep letting all the good buys go to man city :laugh:

Not good that people can own so many teams in the kind of debt they face. I would like to see DiC take control of Liverpool, they have more money.

[Shibby]

There is no international law about owning different sport teams, however on a sport type basis the governing bodies tend to do have laws. For example a person would not be able to own Man Utd and Bayern Munich. I'm pretty sure about this.

On another note it's great that pompey could have a new rich owner soon. We don't want superstars, but we won't mind them. We'd all rather have a new stadium. I am worried though, I don't like it when clubs get rich owners, it makes me cringe at the thought of the clubs going into administration.

[Subject Delta]

I know there is no law, I am just not overly happy about my favourite club being owned by people that are heavily in debt, because at the top level of sport you can't afford to miss out on the opportunity to make the big money signings

[Rappy Veteran]

Doesn't Abramovich own the company that sponsors CSKA Moscow...might be wrong tho...Sibneft I think the company was.

[gregb0b]

^ I duno about that.

But the co-owner of Liverpool just opened that new complex next to Gillete Stadium. It's pretty nice, state of the art etc.... I'm sure hes doing fine on $ lol. As for MAN U i know that the Glazers were looking for investors for the Bucs, that's a little more frightening if you ask me :p

[Kralik]

Doesn't Abramovich own the company that sponsors CSKA Moscow...might be wrong tho...Sibneft I think the company was.

Yeah, thats true I think.. I know for sure I saw in news once that Abramovich owns another football club directly or indirectly in Russia.. don't know if its CSKA though for sure..

EDIT: Yup, I did a bit of fast research and here's something interesting..

AMBRAMOVICH LINK THREATENS CHELSEA AND CSKA

William Gaillard, UEFA's director of communications, said that if Chelsea owner Abramovich has a controlling interest in both he will have to decide which club can stay in the competition, reports Australia?s Fox Sports.

The possible controversy has arisen because Abramovich is a leading shareholder in Russian oil giant Sibneft, which sponsors CSKA.

"We do a superficial check of all clubs to establish that no individual owns more than 51 per cent of two clubs. Where we think there might be a problem we examine the situation more thoroughly."

Chelsea said that UEFA and the Champions League clubs should have no concerns over Abramovich's links with CSKA.

"Mr Abramovich is the owner of Chelsea and Sibneft, a company in which he is one of many shareholders, has a shirt sponsorship deal with CSKA Moscow," said the club's director of communications Simon Greenberg.

"Mr Abramovich has no equity stake nor any direct interest in CSKA Moscow."

...

But Gaillard insists that if there are any doubts, then either Chelsea or CSKA Moscow will not take part in the competition. "If we find that any individual owns more than 51 per cent in two clubs, our rules are very clear. They cannot both compete," he said.

Source

Edited June 4, 2009 by Kralik

[Kralik]

Heres a comment from Goal.com that cracked me up..

Sebastian Geneva

14:11 3 Jun 2009

That one about City 'inevitably' getting to the CL ranks is almost as funny as the one about Chelsea having classy fans.

:rofl:

[Rappy Veteran]

Liverpool FC owners lose ?42.6m

The parent company of Liverpool FC, owned by Tom Hicks and George Gillett, lost ?42.6m in the year to August 2008.

The loss was mainly due to the ?36m of interest payments that Kop Football Holdings had to make to service the debt taken on to buy the club.

Its auditors warned that the need to refinance loans by 24 July cast "significant doubt" on the future of the group as a going concern.

But they added the club's owners were confident they would secure the funds. (BBC[/b]/b>)

[Subject Delta]

Like I keep saying

Get DiC in who have real money and solve this stupid problem. Until they do, we are just gonna keep being outspent by Man City, and Chelsea

[gregb0b]

Neverrrrrrrrrrrr I hope they crash and burn into the debt abyss

[Subject Delta]

Neverrrrrrrrrrrr I hope they crash and burn into the debt abyss

You would, because you are a typical classless chelsea supporter. Football without the big 4 clubs would be boring.

[Rappy Veteran]

Neverrrrrrrrrrrr I hope they crash and burn into the debt abyss

Will never happen

[Subject Delta]

Maybe if Liverpool do fold they can sell Chelsea all their champions league / European cup trophies. At least they can then make it look like they belong :D

After all, they know all about buying trophies...

[Mike]

Like I keep saying

Get DiC in who have real money and solve this stupid problem. Until they do, we are just gonna keep being outspent by Man City, and Chelsea

So you can do what Chelsea did? :rolleyes:

[Martyn]

So you can do what Chelsea did? :rolleyes:

Well put it this way; this summer we will most likely be signing Tuncay and Distin.

We have no money, end of.

[deuz]

man they own new england patriots.... yuck :(

[gregb0b]

Why do you guys take what I say so seriously lol.