New Swag

Christopher Jee

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 24, 2014
3,487
9,104
353
36
The three stripes on the 3-Stripes Jacket look like the reflector tape that was applied to some of my 4-year old's clothing so that he stands out in the dark.
Probably the same taping technology. Not sure if it will be reflective on the NYCFC jacket tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayH

Ulrich

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,883
26,506
353
This is awesome!



This also segues to my other thoughts about Fcking Etihad:
1. It’s been 5 years - time for a new look on our jerseys. They’re stagnate. Variety is what gets a new purchaser interested and a veteran fan to buy a new shirt.
2. Is the marketing effect that Etihad gets from being on the jersey really that significant, or effective at all - are they really gaining new passengers for an airline with very limited routes that they wouldn’t have already had?
3. Can’t etihad, as a money laundering sponsorship owned by the same entity, simply just funnel money to the club by being the official foreign air partner (in name only) for a club that doesn’t really travel internationally - see comment #2 of effectiveness of marketing for new customers (kinda a sham). Etihad can still write whatever size check they need to for their cash-flow shell game.
4. Etihad as a sponsor just kinda sucks - has no connection to NYC and the sponsorship space on the jersey is one of the only ways to let the club be semi-autonomous from the CFG virus.
5. Again, it’s been 5 years..... shirt sponsors just don’t stick around longer than that and this just feels so forced.
 

mgarbowski

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 16, 2014
12,659
36,089
353
Queens, NY
mgarbowski.com
This is awesome!



This also segues to my other thoughts about Fcking Etihad:
1. It’s been 5 years - time for a new look on our jerseys. They’re stagnate. Variety is what gets a new purchaser interested and a veteran fan to buy a new shirt.
2. Is the marketing effect that Etihad gets from being on the jersey really that significant, or effective at all - are they really gaining new passengers for an airline with very limited routes that they wouldn’t have already had?
3. Can’t etihad, as a money laundering sponsorship owned by the same entity, simply just funnel money to the club by being the official foreign air partner (in name only) for a club that doesn’t really travel internationally - see comment #2 of effectiveness of marketing for new customers (kinda a sham). Etihad can still write whatever size check they need to for their cash-flow shell game.
4. Etihad as a sponsor just kinda sucks - has no connection to NYC and the sponsorship space on the jersey is one of the only ways to let the club be semi-autonomous from the CFG virus.
5. Again, it’s been 5 years..... shirt sponsors just don’t stick around longer than that and this just feels so forced.
1-5. Agreed.
OTOH, Etihad has been the Man City shirt sponsor since 2009.
 

Ulrich

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,883
26,506
353
1-5. Agreed.
OTOH, Etihad has been the Man City shirt sponsor since 2009.
It’s painfully obvious it’s laundering for ManCity. It’s the only way they’d ever get sponsorship money totals close to the numbers Liverpool/ManU/Real/Barca/Etc get since the brand is so despised on the world-level and without the vast cash infusion they couldn’t operate with their moneys-no-object decisions. It’s a shame that we’re roped into it as a satellite of the mothership.
 

LionNYC

Registered
Staff member
Elite Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
15,985
27,825
303
New York, NY
This is awesome!



This also segues to my other thoughts about Fcking Etihad:
1. It’s been 5 years - time for a new look on our jerseys. They’re stagnate. Variety is what gets a new purchaser interested and a veteran fan to buy a new shirt.
2. Is the marketing effect that Etihad gets from being on the jersey really that significant, or effective at all - are they really gaining new passengers for an airline with very limited routes that they wouldn’t have already had?
3. Can’t etihad, as a money laundering sponsorship owned by the same entity, simply just funnel money to the club by being the official foreign air partner (in name only) for a club that doesn’t really travel internationally - see comment #2 of effectiveness of marketing for new customers (kinda a sham). Etihad can still write whatever size check they need to for their cash-flow shell game.
4. Etihad as a sponsor just kinda sucks - has no connection to NYC and the sponsorship space on the jersey is one of the only ways to let the club be semi-autonomous from the CFG virus.
5. Again, it’s been 5 years..... shirt sponsors just don’t stick around longer than that and this just feels so forced.
When Etihad (and Emirates) first became massive global airlines it was because in most cases you needed to make a connection when going across the world. Now, there are flights direct from Newark to Singapore and JFK to Sydney. So that connection hub isn't really going to be required anymore to big cities. So, Etihad's position is now more about tourism to Abu Dhabi.

So when we think tourism to Abu Dhabi from the United States (as they are sponsoring not just MLS and NYC), Etihad only has direct flights from JFK, LA, Chicago, DC, and Toronto.

There are some rumblings that Emirates and Etihad would merge, I don't know if this would happen. But anyway, I can't see us dropping the Etihad sponsorship unless there's a change in ownership or the airline fails, in which case we'd probably have Visit Abu Dhabi as our next sponsor.