Adidas couldn’t meet Liverpool’s kit valuation

Adidas CEO Herbert Hainer yesterday announced that the club and the sportswear giant were going their separate ways after Adidas could not meet the reds valuation for their sportswear business.

The reds are set to unveil a record-breaking deal with Warrior Sports, a subdivision of New Balance, worth £25M a year for the next 6 years, in the coming months.

The Adidas CEO said:

“The gap between their performance on the field and what the number should be is not in balance. Then we said, ‘Okay we will not do it. That’s the end of the story.’”

Liverpool’s new deal with Warrior will mean the club will be able to re-take control of all merchandise from adidas.

Hainer continued:

“It all depends on the success and the effort and the popularity, the exposure on TV, revenue you can generate by merchandising.

“This all has to be brought in line between what you offer and what you get. We thought their asking and the delivering is not in the right balance.”

After Umbro, Liverpool’s kits were manufactured with adidas between 1985 and 1996, before returning to the German sportswear firm in 2006.  In the intervening decade the club were in a deal with Reebok.

16 comments on
Adidas couldn’t meet Liverpool’s kit valuation

  1. Warrior should do some decent market research- something fitted like recent England Rugby shirts would look great in the classic  Liverpool red- it all depends on whether they produce something that is euro and Latin american centric or something that uses existing North American templates…I can only live in hope at this stage but as some of the posters above have indicated if its not stylish (at least on a recognisable European Football level no one will want to buy it in the main markets for soccer shirts) 

  2. Shame Adidas aren’t willing to sponsor the kit nemore. Popped of the Warrior Sprts webpage and had a look at some of their stuff. It’s clear they’re more into lacrosse and american football, but with an opportunity to design the kit for the greatest football club in the world, they would be daft to do anything short of brilliant.

  3. Why sign with Warrior? Are you living in the real world here?!!! Adidas were paying us £10m a season, Warrior are paying £25m a season. Over the 6 years of the deal, that is a stonking £90m more. Just think what the club could do with that, or better still who they could sign with that! As for Adidas giving us great shirts, they are actually shoddy quality. Two of mine have holes in from very minor snags. I will also never forgive them for foisting a blue shirt on us (white with blue trim at least) so Warrior can’t possibly be worse.

    As for losing out on sales, you really have no idea! The majority of our sales will come on the opening US market and the VASTLY bigger Far East market where we have millions of fans who will buy ANYTHING that says Liverpool on it. Also the deal is not based on how many shirts we sell so it is entirely in Warrior’s best interest to create good shirts that people want to buy. We still get £25m a season irrespective.

  4. Adidas were right by the way. We’re an awful team. Dalglish should resign ASAP to prevent any further damage to his reputation and status as a legend.

  5. Jesus, does any of this debate matter? As long as it’s red and got a liverbird upon the chest, I coudn’t give a f***k who makes it!

  6. The worth of a brand depends on the guaranteed level of appeal and the level of the appeal does not always solely depend on the current success of that brand. In relation to football, Liverpool Football Club 2012 is a great example. 
     
    Some brands do not have to be successful to appeal and some sponsors and advertisers, although recognising the lack of current success or even, in the case of football, future success, will still throw as much money as possible at that brand to win the rights to pin their badge on it. Again, using football, David Beckham is the greatest example. A player who was bombed out of Old Trafford in 2003, largely because he was unprofessional and into a period from 2003 – 2011 which seen him win one trophy, playing the second half of the season the last time Real Madrid won the league. 
     
    Yet still, up until 2011, Beckham was the highest paid footballer in the world, earning even more than Lionel Messi, but with a just a tea spoon of Messi’s success individually or as a part of a team. Yet one sportswear manufacturer came to the obvious conclusion that although Beckham had become a dead duck on the pitch since Ferguson showed him the door in 2003, they recognised that current success on the pitch, (and in Beckham’s case, almost any success on the pitch), was not always the sole factor when bidding for the rights to promote a brand. Step forward, Adidas, a company who has not paid out record amounts to a player who has continually won almost nothing since he left Old Trafford, except for his Joe Dolce moment for Real Madrid in 2007. 
     
    Adidas may have continually called it right in paying Beckham more than anybody else, I have not got the statistical evidence to argue otherwise, but the fact that Herbert Hainer, of Adidas, can state that the reason Adidas did not compete for the kit rights to Liverpool Football Club is because of a lack of success on the pitch, gives us the chance to ask the question again, does David Beckham really not understand his low standard of worth as a footballer since he left Old Trafford? Consider the Manchester F.A Cup game two weeks ago, Ferguson quite obviously and astutely knew he needed an experienced midfielder and so decided to ask a player to come out of retirement to help him out until the end of the season, Paul Scholes. But what about Beckham, also an ex-United player, also experienced, also around the same age and continually stating in the press that he could not play for anybody in England other than United. The rejection was written all over Beckham’s face, but at least he has finally accepted how Ferguson sees him and has re-signed for ‘The Galaxy’ who, like Adidas, know exactly what they are getting for their money and that Beckham’s contribution is certainly not on the pitch. 
     
    Beckham is employed by football clubs to sell shirts, by Adidas to promote their brand, he is not paid for his current or potential achievements on the pitch, if Hainer does not recognise this, then he is thicker than the people who buy into the Beckham brand.   
     
    Steven Charles, Liverpool

    • because warrior will pay the club more money than adidas which means more money to spend on players.
      personally I think adidas make awful kits and putting blue in the latest one is shocking.

      I only buy shirts I like and i haven’t bought an adidas designed one for years.

  7. The extra revenue of the new deal will need to be massively better than the Adidas one because if the new designs are horrible like some of those crap reebok kits there is every possibility it will not sell anywhere near as well & for the rest of the merchandise, well I am happy to pay for an Adidas LFC coat or shirt but Warrior I think not. Myself & most of the fans I know well, will not pay premium prices to wear something that looks like it belongs on a market stall, the club could lose out in the long term big style!

  8. typical german – accountants mentality, they only see the figures and dont see the value is not only on the field but we are still a global entity and WHEN we start winning trophies 25m will be @peanuts@ (to coin a phrase of the deutche bank ..) ha ha !

  9. Same old schtick – really paying through the nose every year for a new kit whoever manufactures it – fans are a cash cow to be milked. Let’s hope the American firm does not try to foist something horrible on us – heaven knows the recent third kit was just pants…

  10. Crap kits from now on! Lpool and adidas go together great kits – shame. Warrior sports, a sub division of New Balance = S***e kits!

Leave a Reply