Chelsea and Yokohama Rubber Company's new £200m sponsorship deal
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c39ec/c39ec8fe793c7e9c6ef8f04e3008005fa09c2465" alt="Chelsea and Yokohama Rubber Company's new £200m sponsorship deal Chelsea and Yokohama Rubber Company's new £200m sponsorship deal"
Chelsea's huge new shirt sponsorship deal with The Yokohama Rubber Company is the second highest kit deal ever signed by a Premier League club, behind Manchester United's £53million-per-year deal with Chevrolot. The near £40million-a-year agreement is more than double the annual value of Chelsea’s 10-year partnership with Samsung, which expires at the end of the season. So who are The Yokohama Rubber Company and what does the deal mean for Jose Mourinho's side?
Yoko what?
Yokohama Rubber Company. They are a Tokyo-based tyre manufacturer and they are huge. They already sponsor the NBA's Boston Celtics and San Antonio Spurs and now they have added Chelsea to their garage of partners. From next season Samsung will be no more, which is a shame because the logo looked quite nice on those blue shirts. Yokohama's symbol is a big red Y, although there is no word whether that will be used on Chelsea's kits.
So this is will help with that FFP thing everyone bangs on about?
It certainly will. FFP is all about spending within your means (although many would say it's all about keeping the top clubs at the top). Put simply, between 2015 and 2018 clubs will only be allowed to spend £25m more than they earn, so it's time to start earning and this is what deals like this one are all about. The more money Chelsea can bring in, the more they can spend. You will have noticed (because Jose keeps telling you) that Chelsea's carefree days of yesteryear are long gone. To be able to spend £32m on Diego Costa they had to flog David Luiz for £50m. With one eye on summer shopping, Andre Schurrle was sent scurrying to Wolfsburg for £22m.
I don't see United selling loads of players...
You won't. United are ahead of the game on this and have ramped up their commercial operation to ensure they don't have to. They also have a 76,000-capacity stadium, which helps. Chelsea do not have that luxury and so have had to be careful (and they deserve credit for that). For a long time they have been hamstrung by Stamford Bridge's 42,000-capacity. Moves elsewhere (Battersea, Earl's Court etc) have fallen through. It looks as though they will now attempt the tricky task of redeveloping their current home (it's not exactly surrounded by wasteland and motorways) but any increased revenue from attendances remains as far off as Jose taking Martin Atkinson for a night on the tiles down the King's Road.
(dailymail.co.uk)
ANN.Az