Looks alright but £75 ffs! You could just wait until the sponsor peels off your current home shirt (approx. 20 washes), then you have a non branded back at the valley shirt anyway. What's the point of this if only 500 people can buy it? Strange.
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
Of course it will sell out. It would if they charged £150 a pop. Just think it would be better to let all supporters have the opportunity to get their hands on one, if they want.
By all means have special boxes, certificates, unique numbers for the collectors, but a couple of thousand at a reasonable price wouldn't have hurt surely? They cost about a fiver to make each (over estimate?) tbf!
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
But using that logic Henry why don't they throw in a nice signed photo/print of Colin Walsh scoring and make it £150?
If they wanted to make something for the fans they would have produced many more than 500. If it was for those that want to have a memento of the game then they should have made enough for everyone. Making 500 and making it unreasonably expensive makes it look like it's nothing more than a money making exercise - fleecing fans!
Releasing it for sale at 5pm, and announcing it, makes it look like the club suspect that they will sell out (of certain sizes if not completely). This, in my view, undermines the great PR of Hummel making t-shirts available in the summer for £15 for kids that looked a little like a proper shirt. Those t-shirts, which I don't expect to have sold in the many thousands, gave the impression that the club and Hummel were looking out for the fans (or the parents) that couldn't afford proper replicas.
This 'stunt' undoes a lot of that good view in my view - and even if they all sell it only raises £37,500 (before manufacturing and shipping costs and VAT) - a fraction of what the club have, reportedly, spent on PR Agencies. This must, just must, be seen as an own goal. If they'd made 1,000 and sold them for £50 a pop that would almost certainly have made more money but I agree with WSS, they could have made thousands and sold them for £25 - what a great way to show the fans that the club want them to feel at the centre of the celebrations.
This isn't a dig at you Henry but I think the club got this wrong and it would have been so easy to get it right.
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
£45 is way too expensive in the first place, particularly for a third tier club, so I wouldn't use that as a yard stick. And sure, they will sell 500, cos that's a tiny amount. I don't know the economics well enough to comment, but I would much rather they made more and sold them for less.
This is a shirt that's a replica of a shirt that many of us already own, which is odd. And it's supposed to be for the fans - the very people who paid a LOT of their own money, and put in time, effort and a fucking political coup to get the club into a position to return to the ground in the first place!
To buy the three shirts the club have released this year, which I would love to own in my collection, would cost me £160. That's insane, let alone for the shirts of a club that has continually disappointed, nay, broken my heart over the last 5-10 years.
Replica shirts are a source of promotion. It's akin to wearing a Waitrose bag on my head. Yet our 'weird' relationships with football clubs make us proud to advertise them. I feel like a fool for paying through the nose for the right to show people I support the brand, and I feel like Katriene and co. would be laughing at me for spending £75 on a shirt to celebrate the work my fellow fans were responsible for.
At first I thought it was Louis Walsh in the top photo! Before I realised it was his brother, Colin.
Quote from the article:
Museum Trustee Ben Hayes was involved in the fan consultation process. He said: “When Hummel visited the museum we were able to give them their first site of an original back to the Valley shirt. They immediately asked to borrow it and we were delighted to agree. Having now seen the shirt they have produced it’s clear that they have more than fulfilled their brief of creating a fresh, modern shirt that also reflects the history of that day.”
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
Of course it will sell out. It would if they charged £150 a pop. Just think it would be better to let all supporters have the opportunity to get their hands on one, if they want.
By all means have special boxes, certificates, unique numbers for the collectors, but a couple of thousand at a reasonable price wouldn't have hurt surely? They cost about a fiver to make each (over estimate?) tbf!
I agree that 500 boxes and a 1000 or 2000 ordinary shirts would have been better as the the bigger run should have lowered the unit cost.
I do disagree with the "it costs £5" Maybe that is the cost of the shirt at the factory door in China (I assume they are made in China) but shipping costs, point of sale costs, 20% VAT all eat into the £75
Seen on facebook someone claiming £75 x 500 = the club making £37,500 profit but even a trainee economist like @fiish or @cantersaddick would know that was wrong.
And it will be Hummel and Elite making the money with the club getting a slice either as a percentage or as a one-off payment.
Agree with a couple of the above posts - this shouldn't be an exclusive shirt, at a stupid price, it should have been discounted and available to everyone. With a free shirt to anyone who still has their ticket stub
At first I thought it was Louis Walsh in the top photo! Before I realised it was his brother, Colin.
Quote from the article:
Museum Trustee Ben Hayes was involved in the fan consultation process. He said: “When Hummel visited the museum we were able to give them their first site of an original back to the Valley shirt. They immediately asked to borrow it and we were delighted to agree. Having now seen the shirt they have produced it’s clear that they have more than fulfilled their brief of creating a fresh, modern shirt that also reflects the history of that day.”
It's a limited edition, one off shirt in a presentation box so I would expect is to cost more than the £45 for the normal home shirt.
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
But using that logic Henry why don't they throw in a nice signed photo/print of Colin Walsh scoring and make it £150?
If they wanted to make something for the fans they would have produced many more than 500. If it was for those that want to have a memento of the game then they should have made enough for everyone. Making 500 and making it unreasonably expensive makes it look like it's nothing more than a money making exercise - fleecing fans!
Releasing it for sale at 5pm, and announcing it, makes it look like the club suspect that they will sell out (of certain sizes if not completely). This, in my view, undermines the great PR of Hummel making t-shirts available in the summer for £15 for kids that looked a little like a proper shirt. Those t-shirts, which I don't expect to have sold in the many thousands, gave the impression that the club and Hummel were looking out for the fans (or the parents) that couldn't afford proper replicas.
This 'stunt' undoes a lot of that good view in my view - and even if they all sell it only raises £37,500 (before manufacturing and shipping costs and VAT) - a fraction of what the club have, reportedly, spent on PR Agencies. This must, just must, be seen as an own goal. If they'd made 1,000 and sold them for £50 a pop that would almost certainly have made more money but I agree with WSS, they could have made thousands and sold them for £25 - what a great way to show the fans that the club want them to feel at the centre of the celebrations.
This isn't a dig at you Henry but I think the club got this wrong and it would have been so easy to get it right.
No offence taken. I think it is too much and could have been done a lot better but I can see why a short run shirt would be more expensive.
Comments
£75 is ridiculous though
Anyone that pays that needs to have a word with themselves
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rare-1992-Charlton-Back-at-The-Valley-Home-Shirt-Football-Soccer-Jersey-M-L/162752102035?hash=item25e4c7fe93:g:gd0AAOSwnB1ZtXcL
And it is a good shirt.
£60 would seem, to this non-shirt buying person, a reasonable price point.
£75 a step too far even if the short run means it was bound to cost a bit more to manufacture.
But a bit like the £95 dinner price that people thought meant the tickets wouldn't sell they will sell because there are 500 people who either collect shirts, want the newest shirt or just aren't price sensitive.
By all means have special boxes, certificates, unique numbers for the collectors, but a couple of thousand at a reasonable price wouldn't have hurt surely? They cost about a fiver to make each (over estimate?) tbf!
Absolute bonkers pricing but not surprised in the slightest
If they wanted to make something for the fans they would have produced many more than 500. If it was for those that want to have a memento of the game then they should have made enough for everyone. Making 500 and making it unreasonably expensive makes it look like it's nothing more than a money making exercise - fleecing fans!
Releasing it for sale at 5pm, and announcing it, makes it look like the club suspect that they will sell out (of certain sizes if not completely). This, in my view, undermines the great PR of Hummel making t-shirts available in the summer for £15 for kids that looked a little like a proper shirt. Those t-shirts, which I don't expect to have sold in the many thousands, gave the impression that the club and Hummel were looking out for the fans (or the parents) that couldn't afford proper replicas.
This 'stunt' undoes a lot of that good view in my view - and even if they all sell it only raises £37,500 (before manufacturing and shipping costs and VAT) - a fraction of what the club have, reportedly, spent on PR Agencies. This must, just must, be seen as an own goal. If they'd made 1,000 and sold them for £50 a pop that would almost certainly have made more money but I agree with WSS, they could have made thousands and sold them for £25 - what a great way to show the fans that the club want them to feel at the centre of the celebrations.
This isn't a dig at you Henry but I think the club got this wrong and it would have been so easy to get it right.
This is a shirt that's a replica of a shirt that many of us already own, which is odd. And it's supposed to be for the fans - the very people who paid a LOT of their own money, and put in time, effort and a fucking political coup to get the club into a position to return to the ground in the first place!
To buy the three shirts the club have released this year, which I would love to own in my collection, would cost me £160. That's insane, let alone for the shirts of a club that has continually disappointed, nay, broken my heart over the last 5-10 years.
Replica shirts are a source of promotion. It's akin to wearing a Waitrose bag on my head. Yet our 'weird' relationships with football clubs make us proud to advertise them. I feel like a fool for paying through the nose for the right to show people I support the brand, and I feel like Katriene and co. would be laughing at me for spending £75 on a shirt to celebrate the work my fellow fans were responsible for.
Quote from the article: Expected better of you, Henners
I do disagree with the "it costs £5" Maybe that is the cost of the shirt at the factory door in China (I assume they are made in China) but shipping costs, point of sale costs, 20% VAT all eat into the £75
Seen on facebook someone claiming £75 x 500 = the club making £37,500 profit but even a trainee economist like @fiish or @cantersaddick would know that was wrong.
And it will be Hummel and Elite making the money with the club getting a slice either as a percentage or as a one-off payment.
@Rufus_Ambition, like any writer I blame the sub-editors.
(I checked my original copy though and it was
my badmy mistake.