Jump to content

Villa Kit 2016/7


Frank Raphael

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

It's not.

Under Armour is much better than Macron.

Have to agree with this, I have some Under Armour training gear and I love it- top quality stuff in my view. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, villa4europe said:

We're allowed one so I'd be surprised if we didn't even if it was acorns again

Acorns will get great exposure on the back if we still have Lescott "chasing" after attackers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That black and green is lovely, nice work. It's going to have those numbers and letters from the championship though, which just makes the kits look so cheap to me, terrible typeface. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Where's the talk of a second sponsor coming from?

Are we finally switching sports? This lot would have to go some way to being worse cyclers than they are footballers.

You're allowed in the Championship.

Middlesbrough players have got Flamingo Land lovingly emblazoned above their arses -

middlesbrough-david-nugent.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3 May 2016 at 21:38, villa4europe said:

We're allowed one so I'd be surprised if we didn't even if it was acorns again

Whilst Acorns was great at the time, we lost out commercially in a big way (which you could argue has set us up in this position partly). If we can get two paying sponsors we should.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikeyp102 said:

Whilst Acorns was great at the time, we lost out commercially in a big way (which you could argue has set us up in this position partly). If we can get two paying sponsors we should.

Agreed. We have never been sufficiently economically viable to justify a charitable sponsor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said:

Wasn't it at the time just us and Barca with a charity sponsor? And even they have sold out to the oil sheikhs 

They both had slightly cynical reasons behind them.  Barcelona was just a step to having a sponsor on, you can't make such a song and dance about being "more than a club" for years and scoffing at clubs who have sold the space on their shirts then immediately go to having oil money on the kit.  Barca figured to have the fans get used to seeing a brand emblazoned on the shirt they would go with a brand that people couldn't really complain about and went with Unicef.  Nice gesture? Sure, but I'll bet you a pound to a penny they wouldn't have done it if they didn't have Qatar Airlines lined up to follow it. 

Villa?  I believe Acorns was just an attempt to drive the value of the space on the front of our shirts up. Cause a bit of a stir in popular media then maybe get a few million quid extra next time the space is up for sale. I doubt it paid off financially but I can see what they were trying. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VillaJ100 said:

Never knew that Barca went without a shirt sponsor for so long, interesting 

They only held out for about 20 years longer than everybody else.  Villa went from 1874-1982* without having a sponsor which isn't bad either. :P 

 

*yes, I know sponsorships were not allowed for most of that time, hence the smiley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â