Skip to main content

"If you want some accessible but informative insight into football then I suggest you couldn't do better than the Political Economy of Football website, which is not only intelligible but comes with the added bonus of being written by Addicks fan Wyn Grant."
Ben Hayes - Charlton Athletic programme

Why was the Chevrolet United deal so big?


Simon Hines, the editor of Sponsorship Today, assesses the recent sponsorship deal between Chevrolet and Manchester United:

So why has the new deal broken previous records by such a high margin?  The first point to look at is the starting date. By the time the sponsorship starts in earnest in 2014, it will have been four years since the Aon deal was signed, so it is not an overnight doubling. Rights values for major properties are now growing at a rate well ahead of inflation.

Recent deals between Manchester City and Etihad and Liverpool and Standard Chartered, both above the $30m mark, raised eyebrows. Barcelona's first commercial shirt deal set a new benchmark and it was almost inevitable that Manchester United, the world's most commercial club, would trump that.  The club has boosted its sponsorship income dramatically in recent years, having signed a series of local deals in Asia, Africa and the Middle East with telecoms companies and it is this global presence that Chevrolet is paying to tap into. The American car giant is certainly keen to boost its international image through sponsorship and has deals with e.g. the Spanish football federation; RFEF, Liverpool and China's most popular athlete; Liu Xiang.  

That said, the obvious question remains: why did the car giant have to pay so much? If $40m is the market rate at present, why $70m in two years time - it is a huge hike?  There are four possible answers here. Already a few rumours are starting about a possible naming rights element to the deal. Personally I doubt this is the case. Anyone trying to take naming rights to Old Trafford (as with other established grounds such as Anfield) would be inviting the wrath of the relatively small - but influential - group of long-standing English fans. Personally I doubt that Chevrolet would have a lot to gain from naming rights, so long as their contract states that no other brand will be offered the opportunity.  

The second issue is whether or not there was a bidding war. Despite the obvious value of the Manchester Utd brand, this is unlikely. Most of the really big global sponsors who would fit the bill have committed to their portfolios at present. Also, there has to be a question as to whether Manchester United is currently in decline. Last season was the first in years without a trophy and the squad is looking weaker than it has for a long time Its competitive edge appears to be down to Sir Alex Ferguson getting the most from limited resources, and he is surely set to retire before the new deal has run its course. Chelsea and Manchester City have invested heavily in their squads and the Spanish giants of Barca and Real Madrid are very strong in Europe.  

The redeeming factor for Manchester Utd could be UEFA's Financial Fair Play rule, which will curb spending among benefactor backed clubs and potentially reduce wage inflation and transfer fees. Manchester Utd will be well placed to take advantage due to its high earnings, so long as it can reduce the interest payments on its huge debt.  

Another question is whether the quoted figures will be the actual amounts paid. Very often reported values of sponsorship deals are based on the rights holder meeting all of its incentive targets i.e. in this case winning the Champions League, Premiership and FA Cup every year and doing nothing to draw adverse publicity on the sponsor. It is therefore not unusual for deals to be reported up to 25% above their base value.  

Finally, could it be that Chevrolet has simply paid over the odds? This does happen in sponsorship where brands actually want it to be known that they have paid top dollar - it demonstrates a corporate bravado and sends out a message to competitors about their ambitions.  

However, Chevrolet's parent, General Motors, fired Joel Ewanick, its global marketing chief just as the deal broke. The timing was curious. U.S analysts, supposedly with inside information, claim the move had nothing to do with the deal and was related to Ewanick's inability to grow market share. But from a PR point of view, firing your head of marketing just as you announce one of the most prestigious sponsorship deals in history is an 'unusual' combination.  

When the dust has settled, the really interesting question will be to see what happens to Chelsea and Arsenal's deals in the next couple of years. They are currently both below $20 million and the pressure will be on them now to exceed $35 million per season. A tall order with the global economy in its current state.  

uniteds chevrolet deal

or could it be that the fairplay financial rules come into force next year Whereby a club can only spend a specified percentage of its annual turnover on wages. Just a thought, there will be a fair few clubs looking to manufacture some extra turnover.