Leigh announce Reebok as kit supplier

[JohnM]

Still no details of the "deal". If this was IMG, the usual suspects would be clamouring for full disclosure of, well, everything.

But is it really Reebok Corporate in the US, because, as the primary school kid that wrote the press release in crayon says, "John Carden, MD of Leeds-based Sports Hub Group, exclusive UK/IRE Reebok team wear licensee..."

Still, if Reebok are giving Leigh 100 or so free shirts, it'll be a big money-saver for the club. They ARE giving them for nothing, aren't they? Leigh aren't paying anything? 

I think we should be told .

Edited October 18, 2024 by JohnM

[Yakstorm]

The deal is between Leigh and Reebok Teamsports, which is run by Sports Hub in the UK as the licensee.  Considering Sports Hub is also the licensee for Patrick, and formalised the Leigh deal for 2024, it is either a renewal or an amendment to the current business arrangement.

Now whilst it is Sports Hub who is doing all the heavy lifting, ultimately Reebok Corporate would have had to sign off on the deal.  Reebok, like most major sports brands, are very strict with regards to what sports teams wear their logo.  Sports Hub must have been able to put forward a good business case for Reebok where they felt it would be beneficial for them otherwise it would be Patrick or New Balance on the kit for next year.

Are Leigh hamming the importance of the announcement a bit? Sure, but it's certainly not a bad thing for a recognisable brand, like Reebok, to be associated with the code.  

[binosh]

10 hours ago, RayCee said:

Apparently, there's no such thing as bad publicity either.

True, and in other news not everybody understands sarcasm.

Went fishing only caught a tiddler. 

[binosh]

4 hours ago, JohnM said:

Still no details of the "deal". If this was IMG, the usual suspects would be clamouring for full disclosure of, well, everything.

But is it really Reebok Corporate in the US, because, as the primary school kid that wrote the press release in crayon says, "John Carden, MD of Leeds-based Sports Hub Group, exclusive UK/IRE Reebok team wear licensee..."

Still, if Reebok are giving Leigh 100 or so free shirts, it'll be a big money-saver for the club. They ARE giving them for nothing, aren't they? Leigh aren't paying anything? 

I think we should be told .

I actually think this is intended as a serious post.

Give Reebok a call and ask them the question if it’s keeping you up at night. Do you work for RL commercial by any chance?

 

[gingerjon]

13 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

No idea how they’ve pulled that off but great to see us attracting a big global brand to SL

Good example of taking a reasonably mundane aspect of the game and making it a positive and big deal. Like it.

[JDM]

7 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:

The deal is being driven by the Cousins from over the pond imo who will be coming into RL big time soon

the days of cushy jobs for under achievers will be long gone soon, colouring in degrees from polys will not count anymore

what on earth are you talking about? 

[JohnM]

Can't blame Leigh for milking everything and anything in the cause of publicity in the close season. 

Equally, can't blame people for the forensic examination and criticism since that is in line with that accorded to the RFL/IMG deal.

Yes, we get that they want to sell shirts, in the way that soccer clubs do, by changing the strip as often as they can get away with.

However, things are not always as they seem in the world of the double-glazing salesman and Ultimate Rugby League.

Reebok appears to be owned by the American Authentic Brands Group, having been sold to them  by Adidas.  Given Reebok annual global sales of just over $2billion, it seems unlikely that this arrangement with Leigh, which like all our clubs, is a small business in a small regional sport, will have reached board level in the US. In business terms, this is not like a PL club signing up.

And yes, I take the point that Reebok would want to be careful about it's brand image but I suggest that as long as the arrangement complies contractually with the corporate rules, it will have been signed off locally, just like any deal allowing say, a local sports shop to sell Reebok. 

Edited October 18, 2024 by JohnM

[JohnM]

12 minutes ago, JDM said:

what on earth are you talking about? 

He's not getting enough sleep.

[gingerjon]

37 minutes ago, JDM said:

what on earth are you talking about? 

Don't worry, it's part of the act that he meets people in Leigh corporate who are about to go big for RL in North America.

[MattSantos]

27 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Can't blame Leigh for milking everything and anything in the cause of publicity in the close season. 

Equally, can't blame people for the forensic examination and criticism since that is in line with that accorded to the RFL/IMG deal.

Yes, we get that they want to sell shirts, in the way that soccer clubs do, by changing the strip as often as they can get away with.

However, things are not always as they seem in the world of the double-glazing salesman and Ultimate Rugby League.

Reebok appears to be owned by the American Authentic Brands Group, having been sold to them  by Adidas.  Given Reebok annual global sales of just over $2billion, it seems unlikely that this arrangement with Leigh, which like all our clubs, is a small business in a small regional sport, will have reached board level in the US. In business terms, this is not like a PL club signing up.

And yes, I take the point that Reebok would want to be careful about it's brand image but I suggest that as long as the arrangement complies contractually with the corporate rules, it will have been signed off locally, just like any deal allowing say, a local sports shop to sell Reebok. 

What's wrong with you?

[LeytherRob]

10 hours ago, JohnM said:

Reebok really did start off in Bolton.  Originally a manufacturer of proper running shoes well before trainers became de rigeur with the Paris catwalk crowd. Ahead of the trend as are all Wigan fans, I had a pair of their running shoes back in the 1970s. 

Late to the party, Reese Witherspoon, Joe Jonas, Sydney Sweeney, Gigi Hadid, Sofia Richie, Emily Ratajkowski, Katie Holmes, Kate Bosworth and The Bachelorette alum Kaitlyn Bristowe have been spotted wearing Reebok trainers.

Etiquette expert William Hanson reckons Reeboks are "so 1995". But that's trainers not clothing.

Of course, we don't know the intimate details of the deal, such as, which bit of Reebok , was it signed off locallyor UK head office, is the players kit free, how many sets a season, what the margin on shop sales is, is the price and discount volume-based. Given that some people on here want to know the intimate details of the IMG deal, it seems perfectly reasonable to ask it of the Reebok deal.

 

6 hours ago, JohnM said:

Still no details of the "deal". If this was IMG, the usual suspects would be clamouring for full disclosure of, well, everything.

But is it really Reebok Corporate in the US, because, as the primary school kid that wrote the press release in crayon says, "John Carden, MD of Leeds-based Sports Hub Group, exclusive UK/IRE Reebok team wear licensee..."

Still, if Reebok are giving Leigh 100 or so free shirts, it'll be a big money-saver for the club. They ARE giving them for nothing, aren't they? Leigh aren't paying anything? 

I think we should be told .

 

35 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Can't blame Leigh for milking everything and anything in the cause of publicity in the close season. 

Equally, can't blame people for the forensic examination and criticism since that is in line with that accorded to the RFL/IMG deal.

Yes, we get that they want to sell shirts, in the way that soccer clubs do, by changing the strip as often as they can get away with.

However, things are not always as they seem in the world of the double-glazing salesman and Ultimate Rugby League.

Reebok appears to be owned by the American Authentic Brands Group, having been sold to them  by Adidas.  Given Reebok annual global sales of just over $2billion, it seems unlikely that this arrangement with Leigh, which like all our clubs, is a small business in a small regional sport, will have reached board level in the US. In business terms, this is not like a PL club signing up.

And yes, I take the point that Reebok would want to be careful about it's brand image but I suggest that as long as the arrangement complies contractually with the corporate rules, it will have been signed off locally, just like any deal allowing say, a local sports shop to sell Reebok. 

https://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/sleep-requirements

[JohnM]

Copycat!

[Dave T]

A strong brand on a kit and a really positive press release that shouts about it. 

Exactly what we want really isn't it?

Most People are not bothered about the technicalities of who the deal is with, that's corporate boring stuff, fans will be able to go and buy a Leigh shirt with Reebok branding, which adds credibility in some people's eyes.

Edited October 18, 2024 by Dave T

[Henson Park Old Firm]

We need more blue chip suppliers... Umbro, Puma even Nike

[Gav Wilson]

Fair play to Leigh, the badge is still naff but everything else about the Leopards creates a buzz. Good on them!

[whatmichaelsays]

1 hour ago, Henson Park Old Firm said:

We need more blue chip suppliers... Umbro, Puma even Nike

RL as a whole (never mind any one club) doesn't sell the sorts of volumes that these manufacturers are interested in. 

Even Leeds United, who sell more shirts domestically in the UK than some of the "big six" can't justify the space in Adidas' factory for a bespoke design - they're making do with the same templates that most of their clubs are. 

It essentially comes down to commercials. People might sneer at Oxen, but I doubt any of those bigger suppliers is calling Leeds offering to beat the £535k per-year that the club gets from its ten-year deal with Elite Pro Sports. They'd probably expect the cash to flow the other way. 

Edited October 18, 2024 by whatmichaelsays

[EastLondonMike]

16 hours ago, Dave T said:

According to Google, the licence holders are a Leeds based company who also hold New Balance team sports rights as well as Patrick.

Always good to see a recognisable brand on kits.

I was just about to post similar. The license is held by the same company who did the Patrick kits. So no real shift, but, for the average man on the street the perception will be different, and could likely mean great sales for the club. And always nice to see a prominent brand associated with the game.

Perception goes a long way.

[EastLondonMike]

1 hour ago, Henson Park Old Firm said:

We need more blue chip suppliers... Umbro, Puma even Nike

I actually think the opposite to be honest. RL doesn't need those big names - Those big names will never promote RL through their association until RL is a big deal and translates beyond the confines of the sport itself, like Football does, and a number of US sports.

What RL needs is to invest in people who have the knowledge and understanding on how to make their own product. And cut out the middle man. Go direct to source. Its happening in Football already in some cases, alongside the association with big brands resulting in a best of both worlds scenario for them.

But RL doesn't have the pleasure of being able to do that. Such a thing is infinitely doable, with the right team of people.

[Harry Stottle]

5 hours ago, JohnM said:

However, things are not always as they seem in the world of the double-glazing salesman and Ultimate Rugby League.

I am sure there is some medication or counselling that could help with this compulsion you have towards Mr Beaumont, it can't be healthy.

[Dave T]

28 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I am sure there is some medication or counselling that could help with this compulsion you have towards Mr Beaumont, it can't be healthy.

Yeah, it's a bit annoying when people go on about the same thing over and over ain't it?

[Fly-By-TheWire]

19 hours ago, Welshleaguelover said:

Nobody under the age of 50 wears reebok gear these days.

Better make a note of that, as I'm off to the Designer Outlet Mall later.   Can I keep my British Knights basketball boots?

[dkw]

9 minutes ago, Fly-By-TheWire said:

Better make a note of that, as I'm off to the Designer Outlet Mall later.   Can I keep my British Knights basketball boots?

Ooh, BK`s, thats a throwback. Loved them back in the day.

[Worzel]

18 hours ago, Leigh-On-Kiwi said:

Reebok has never been out. Also, I don't know if you're down with the kids but retro is back in, or so i've been told.  I think you're talking out of your behind on this one. Granted it's not a Nike or Addidas but it's still a giant of the sporting world.

If New Balance can be made cool for the kids, as it seems to be, then all bets are off for anything... in my era those horrific trainers were synonymous with American middle-aged dads on holiday, often seen with a #### pack [or bum bag, assuming the inevitable censorship by this forum's tech  ]

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Worzel said:

If New Balance can be made cool for the kids, as it seems to be, then all bets are off for anything... in my era those horrific trainers were synonymous with American middle-aged dads on holiday, often seen with a #### pack [or bum bag, assuming the inevitable censorship by this forum's tech  ]

The cool kids these days (assuming Tiny Ginger and his friends are at least adjacent to cool) all look like what the dweebier sorts (i.e. me) looked like circa 1992, albeit with better footwear. I find this very disconcerting.

[Worzel]

25 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The cool kids these days (assuming Tiny Ginger and his friends are at least adjacent to cool) all look like what the dweebier sorts (i.e. me) looked like circa 1992, albeit with better footwear. I find this very disconcerting.

It's weird eh? I was, and remain, cool as f### and if anyone had even tried to make me wear New Balance trainers I may have chosen life as a double amputee instead. 

In fact, the same goes for Reebok. The Reebok Classic was a poor man's Adidas Stan Smith, and that was their only wearable shoe the rest were awful. One step up from Gola!!