Glazers lose their Manchester United training kit sponsor due to fan unrest

Manchester United v Southampton - Premier League
Getty Images

The owners of the defending Super Bowl champions continue to defend their ownership of an English soccer club. And it’s not going well.

Via The Guardian, the Glazer family’s Manchester United soccer club has lost a training kit deal worth 200 million pounds ($240 million U.S.). The agreement with The Hut Group was due to begin on July 1.

Under the deal, the branding of MyProtein would have replaced AON, which currently sponsors the team’s training center and practice jerseys.

Per the report, The Hut Group was “taken aback” by the backlash against Manchester United’s corporate partners in the aftermath of last Sunday’s protest that resulted in the postponement of a match against Liverpool. Other companies under assault includeΒ Adidas, TAG Heuer, and Cadbury.

Chevrolet currently has its name and logo on the Manchester United game kit. TeamViewer is scheduled to replace Chevy for the 2021-22 season. Presumably, the successful scuttling of the training kit deal will embolden opponents of the Glazers to more aggressively push for TeamViewer to bail out, too.

12 responses to “Glazers lose their Manchester United training kit sponsor due to fan unrest

  1. The solution is obvious.

    Relocate Manchester United to Tampa, no more protests.. πŸ˜πŸ˜‚

  2. Not surprising. The utter greed and tone-deafness involved in the failed (for now) Super League concept didn’t have fans in mind in the least, and fandom in Europe runs deep – that team was founded in 1878.

  3. The Glazers are not going anywhere,the team is not going anywhere and the fans will still be coming to the games. Another company will jump right in there to have their name on a Premiership team kit in a few days. Plus keep in mind that 5 other English clubs wanted to breakaway from the burden of being in dodgy organization of UEFA.

    Here is an example of UEFA behavior. The Premier League clubs along with Atletico Madrid, AC Milan and Inter Milan have officially signed up to a settlement with UEFA to participate only in the existing open European competitions and accepted giving up five per cent of revenue for one season playing in Europe.

    “The founding clubs have suffered, and continue to suffer, unacceptable third-party pressures, threats, and offences to abandon the project and therefore desist from their right and duty to provide solutions to the football ecosystem via concrete proposals and constructive dialogue,” Barcelona, Madrid and Juventus said. “This is intolerable under the rule of law.”

  4. As a Bucs fan nothing would please me more than the Glazers selling Man U.

  5. I’m sure the Glazer family were friends with Bernie Madoff and have Eddie Lampert over for holiday meals.

  6. ThePewterPirate says:
    May 9, 2021 at 11:03 am
    The solution is obvious.

    Relocate Manchester United to Tampa, no more protests.. πŸ˜πŸ˜‚

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    That would have been a great solution, if It weren’t for British law prohibiting clubs to relocate.

  7. Other sponsors will be lining up. You know just cuz the Glazers own Man U doesn’t make it a freaking NFL story every time the people across the pond get their panties in a bunch.

  8. The difference between European Football is that at the end of the day, Manchester can fall out of the Premier league if they can’t afford good players with losing sponsorship. Unlike the Franchise model in the NFL, where its impossible for the Ownership to lose value with their NFL or MLS team.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.