No. Definitely not allowed. We censor all criticism of Arsenal FC on this website. Go ahead, just look at any thread and you will find no evidence whatsoever of criticism of Arsenal FC.
Don’t like signing deals that long, they end up looking like poor deals in a couple of years.
How much is it? The original deal plus £1?
With no option to get a training kit sponsor I’m not sure how good this deal is.
£40m per year must be significantly more than what we’re on now.
With our current form, this is a good deal.
Previous was 30m until 2019.
United’s Chevrolet was 47m in 2014 until 2021.
Chelsea Yokohama 40m Until 2020.
Liverpool standard 30m until 2019.
Spurs AIA 35m until 2022.
I would guess if 40m is true its not an embarrassing amount.
Happy we’re staying with Emirates as it’s probably one of the nicest sponsor’s to have on a football top.
Stadium naming rights included however. How longer Arsenal keeps the name the less attractive namings rights for the stadium will become for future parties, because ‘Emirates Stadium’ will be so embedded.
Having said that I’m not sure what sponsors would pay to have their name on a stadium anyway.
If I’ve read it correctly that hasn’t been extended. They already had them until 2028.
I know. I was referring to the numbers @Craigie mentioned for other the teams. Ours includes stadium naming rights.
A long term partnership on stadium naming rights is the ideal situation for both parties. At this point the Emirates brand over Ashburton is too strong for any other sponsor to even consider Sponsorship.
West ham have actively trying to find a stadium sponsor for ages but no one is interested because “Olympic stadium” brand is too strong.
Yeah no matter what happens in the future it’ll always be The Emirates Stadium to me
That’s why Arsenal shouldn’t have done it for as long as it has been…
Arsenal is not West Ham United. With all do respect.
It’s not really as simple as that. Football stadium naming deals aren’t the norm in english football. It’s extremely unlikely that Arsenal would be able to secure multiple and successive short term naming right deals that also rise in Sponsorship money. The more naming rights partners you have the more unattractive sponsorship becomes, like I said long term partnership is ideal.
Arsenal fans aren’t particularly attached to the name Ashburton so the length of the naming rights deal was fine. We needed the money and the security for long term financial planning
Arsenal have done extremely well to secure a long term partner, in Emirates, Who are pretty committed to football generally. It’s unlikely they’d ever give up the naming rights to the Emirates considering their investment in football as a whole which is great for us.
As far as naming rights sponsorship goes, the Olympic stadium is by a far more lucrative sponsor opportunity in all conceivable areas than the Ashburton Grove. Club stature hasn’t really got anything to do with it.
I fully well understand why Arsenal did it at the time. If you compare the numbers out of @Craigie’s however post you could make the argument Emirates are just given the naming rights at this point. United, Chelsea and Liverpool (in the future) touch that number of 40 million without giving the naming rights of their stadium to the same sponsor.
Club stature has everything do with it…obviously top six clubs have a lot more exposure than the other 14 clubs in the Premier League. Sponsors choose clubs to expand their brand. It’s irrelevant that it’s the (former) Olympic Stadium.
“Emirates are again demonstrating their great belief in our approach and ambition and their significantly increased investment will help us continue to compete for trophies and bring more success to the club and our fans around the world.”
Yeah for sure