Shirt Sponsors; Money over Matter

As the 2008/09 season approaches, several football clubs will be playing in and retailing their brand new football kits. The launch of a new football kit is an exciting time for any fan, being able to get their first glimpse of what their favourite players will be sporting all season. These events are not always met with positive feedback; like Marmite, the new strip can either be loved or hated... but either way fans will begin to reminisce of their sides better strips through history.

The colours, design, even the shape of a new kit is vitally important to players and fans. It was always highly unlikely that Manchester United would release a collar-less shirt whilst Eric Cantona was wearing the no.7. However this article is not concerned with these aspects, but focussed on just one element; the shirt sponsor.

The great Liverpool side of the late 1970s receives many plaudits for its innovative success on the field, but off the field they were also leading footballing innovation by becoming the first top flight English side to wear a brand name across their shirt, with Hitachi sponsoring the Anfield side from 1978. The figure involved in that particular contract was certainly far from the £500,000 Sharp paid Manchester United in 1982 for a five-year shirt sponsorship deal, and a whole universe away from the £50m that Samsung have paid Chelsea for their five-year deal in 2005.

But whilst highlighting the extraordinary revenue stream that is shirt sponsorship, my main concern is with who, and why certain companies are sponsoring top-flight clubs. Last season's list of Premier League shirt sponsors is not the most recognisable list of companies. Does the average football fan know who are Chang (Everton), Karoo (Hull City), Garmin (Middlesborough), OKI (Portsmouth) or even AIG (Manchester United)?

Then there's the companies that people may know, but surely feel no influence over. Most fans will have heard of Fly Emirates, and know that they're an airline company, but who is more inclined to use their services from seeing their name on the Arsenal shirt? It's surely quite a select consumer that is influenced from that shirt sponsorship. The same must surely apply to Crown Paints (Blackburn Rovers), LG (Fulham) and Northern Rock (Newcastle United).

There has been an increase in the number of online casinos and poker sites that are sponsoring within sport, noticeably Mansion's deal with Tottenham Hotspur and SBOBET rescuing West Ham United's blank shirt. These are collaborations with conceivable potential. Alcohol (Carlsberg and Liverpool) is an understandable venture too as, to football's detriment, there's a strong relationship between the pair.

In 1995, the FA Premier League Fan Survey showed that almost a third of fans found the products affiliated to their club as "more attractive". So should sponsors not aim to reach the largest target market? The 18-30 year old is almost certainly the ideal recipient to a Premier League football club, young enough to be influenced, but old enough to have disposable cash. In truth, should we not be seeing more football shirts like La Liga's Getafe? It could be argued that Burger King advertising on your shirt isn't exactly promoting a healthy lifestyle, but in that case how much longer can Carlsberg exist on the Liverpool shirt? Perhaps we should all take the Aston Villa route and give up the advertising space for charity.