JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Monday, March 3, 2025

Avec kit deal bad for T&T football

by

1723 days ago
20200615

Dear Ed­i­tor

There is much crit­i­cism of the de­ci­sion to re­place the elect­ed lead­er­ship of TTFA with a FI­FA nor­mal­i­sa­tion com­mit­tee so ear­ly in its tenure. Crit­ics have ques­tioned the tim­ing and put for­ward all kinds of con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries as to why the Unit­ed TTFA team were al­lowed less than four months at the helm.

Could it be, how­ev­er, that af­ter vis­it­ing TTFA in Feb­ru­ary, the FI­FA rep­re­sen­ta­tives saw signs of gross fi­nan­cial mis­man­age­ment and poor de­ci­sion mak­ing that had to be nipped in the bud?

With the elec­tion of an open­ly an­ti-FI­FA ex­ec­u­tive in Trinidad and To­ba­go, who im­me­di­ate­ly closed and ridiculed the Home of Foot­ball - opened with im­mense pride by In­fan­ti­no mere days be­fore - it is ob­vi­ous that the FI­FA pres­i­dent would view the new TTFA regime with con­tempt.

So when FI­FA looked at the debt re­duc­tion plans of Unit­ed TTFA and their first few man­age­ment de­ci­sions, alarm bells start­ed to ring.

The uni­form deal with un­known Eng­lish sup­pli­er Avec was an­nounced by Unit­ed TTFA as a key el­e­ment of its debt re­duc­tion plan. An­nounc­ing a deal that would gen­er­ate TT$25 mil­lion over four years, this was the first big piece of busi­ness in­tro­duced by the new regime.

Un­for­tu­nate­ly, William Wal­lace, who cam­paigned on a plat­form of open­ness, good gov­er­nance and trans­paren­cy - ne­go­ti­at­ed and signed the con­tract with Avec be­fore ob­tain­ing ap­proval or in­put from its own TTFA board of di­rec­tors.

And once board mem­bers de­mand­ed sight of the con­tract, the then Pres­i­dent Wal­lace re­fused to dis­trib­ute copies but in­stead in­sist­ed that the con­tract could be viewed at the TTFA of­fice, but not be copied and tak­en away. Thus, di­rec­tors were forced to at­tempt to ab­sorb a 16-page con­tract with fig­ures quot­ed in both UK and US cur­ren­cies af­ter at­tend­ing a board meet­ing.

On clos­er in­spec­tion, the con­tract did not ap­pear to be the in­come re­duc­ing God­send de­scribed by Unit­ed TTFA.

Let's be clear on this: uni­form sup­pli­ers are there to make mon­ey. While gi­ants such as Adi­das and Nike will sup­ply free uni­forms to big-name na­tions and clubs, they do so with care­ful­ly mea­sured pre­dic­tions of repli­ca sales. They are forced to ne­go­ti­ate against the oth­er big names to ob­tain the mar­ket­ing ku­dos of equip­ping World cham­pi­ons and elite sports clubs and teams who have con­stant me­dia cov­er­age and top name play­ers and coach­es.

Sad­ly, for now, Trinidad and To­ba­go foot­ball do not be­long in that cat­e­go­ry.

But Avec is build­ing a brand and T&T would be a coup that could lead to oth­er na­tion­al as­so­ci­a­tions com­ing on board. Still, the com­pa­ny would need to en­ter a con­tract that would pro­vide them with fi­nan­cial sta­bil­i­ty. So the deal of­fered would al­ways ben­e­fit the sup­pli­er first.

The Avec con­tract guar­an­tees the sup­ply of free equip­ment for TTFA's na­tion­al men and women's teams at se­nior, U20, U17, U15 and U13 lev­els.

The val­ue of this equip­ment equates to ap­prox­i­mate­ly TT$1,300,000 per year, for 4 years. Over TT$5 mil­lion worth of equip­ment. On the face of it, a good deal for TTFA.

But when we look at the con­tract with Avec agreed by Unit­ed TTFA with­out its board ap­proval, some very wor­ry­ing com­mit­ments come to light.

Unit­ed TTFA has agreed to pur­chase a min­i­mum of 7,500 repli­ca jer­seys each year for 4 years. That fig­ure may seem achiev­able to a na­tion play­ing reg­u­lar home fix­tures and achiev­ing re­spectable re­sults.

But to a busi­ness­man tasked to re­duc­ing debt, it's a big con­cern. The jer­seys will each cost TTFA US$29.65 ex­clud­ing vat (around TT$192.72). The con­tract de­mands pay­ment be­fore the goods are shipped, which means that TTFA is com­mit­ted to spend­ing around TT$1,445,400 ex­clud­ing vat each year for four years - TT$5,781,600.

Once in pos­ses­sion of these jer­seys, it is then the re­spon­si­bil­i­ty of TTFA to sell these items as quick­ly as pos­si­ble to re­coup their out­lay.

To do this, Unit­ed TTFA en­tered in­to a well-pub­li­cised deal with Sports & Games. Again, on the sur­face, a pro­gres­sive move. S&G will have ex­clu­sive rights to re­tail the jer­seys and will re­turn 80% of net prof­its to TTFA. If all goes well, TTFA will see a tidy prof­it.

<Hop­ing for the best, plan­ning for the worse>

But there are many ques­tions to be an­swered be­fore an in­vest­ment such as this takes place. The first and ob­vi­ous ques­tion is where will TTFA ob­tain the $TT1.5 mil­lion to pur­chase the jer­seys? How much will the jer­seys re­tail for? Af­ter all, TTFA jer­seys will be com­pet­ing with big brands such as Adi­das and Nike who will be push­ing repli­ca jer­seys from clubs such as Barcelona and Man Utd. When faced with a choice, where will T&T foot­ball fans spend their mon­ey? And worse, in 2022 we will en­counter the huge World Cup mar­ket­ing cam­paign push­ing repli­ca jer­seys from Ger­many, Brazil, Ar­genti­na etc.

As a busi­ness, you need to hope for the best, but plan for the worse. Un­for­tu­nate­ly for Unit­ed TTFA they ei­ther did not un­der­stand this or chose to ig­nore it. Be­cause the worst has hap­pened. With the coro­n­avirus (COVID-19) pan­dem­ic, foot­ball is at a stand­still like all oth­er sports and economies across the world. With un­told months of in­ac­tion from our na­tion­al teams, this can hard­ly pro­vide fer­tile re­tail con­di­tions as de­sired by Unit­ed TTFA. Hard­ly con­ducive to lux­u­ry pur­chas­es such as repli­ca jer­seys.

So Unit­ed TTFA has gam­bled by com­mit­ting to spend­ing near­ly TT$1.5 mil­lion per year - mon­ey that could have been used to re­duce debts.

An­oth­er key as­pect of the Avec deal is that Unit­ed TTFA has com­mit­ted to pur­chase fur­ther Avec equip­ment. At a cost per year of just over TT$1 mil­lion.

This equip­ment, again, will be ex­clu­sive­ly sold by Sports & Games and will in­clude items such as track­suits, kit bags, caps, shorts, socks etc.

But re­al­is­ti­cal­ly, what is the like­li­hood of S&G sell­ing that quan­ti­ty of mi­nor brand equip­ment that earns them on­ly 20% of net prof­it, when they will be stock­ing ma­jor brand items with far greater markup? And every year, an­oth­er TT$1 mil­lion worth of stock will ar­rive!

Re­gard­ing pur­chas­es of repli­ca jer­seys and equip­ment, the con­tract ac­tu­al­ly com­mits the items to be pur­chased by the TTFA's “Ap­proved Re­tail Part­ner” and TTFA's “spon­sors”.

Yet these en­ti­ties are not named in the con­tract and did not sign the con­tract. How­ev­er, fail­ure to pur­chase these an­nu­al quan­ti­ties will re­sult in TTFA hav­ing to pay the full val­ue of the free na­tion­al team uni­forms.

So here's the re­al dan­ger: If Sports & Games, for any rea­son, fail to pur­chase the TT$2.5 mil­lion worth of stock in, say, year 4 of this con­tract, TTFA will owe Avec over TT$5 mil­lion. A com­mit­ment that was nev­er ap­proved by the TTFA board.

As men­tioned at the be­gin­ning of this let­ter, Avec is a busi­ness, and they, un­der­stand­ably, have con­struct­ed a deal in which they can­not lose. A glance at the “free” uni­forms to be sup­plied shows that there are far more items be­ing sup­plied than are nec­es­sary for an as­so­ci­a­tion with an al­leged debt of TT$50 mil­lion.

<Qual­i­ty of uni­forms for lim­it­ed us­age>

First­ly, is it nec­es­sary to pur­chase full sets of new uni­forms each year? Even if each na­tion­al team played 12 games per year, which is un­like­ly, can these uni­forms not with­stand such low lev­els of us­age? Ob­vi­ous­ly, there is wear and tear. But 60 home and 60 away jer­seys per team, per year?

Does each team re­quire 120 track­suits per year? In our cli­mate, track­suits would on­ly be es­sen­tial for away trips out­side of the Caribbean and Cen­tral Amer­i­ca. On­ly 20-24 play­ers would trav­el. So why 120 track­suits per team, per year?

Do we need 120 po­lo shirts per squad? Sure­ly, they would on­ly be need­ed for the 20-24 play­ers se­lect­ed for each squad. That should to­tal no more than 50 play­ers per squad per year. And are base­ball caps a ne­ces­si­ty? Amid a fi­nan­cial cri­sis such as the cur­rent TTFA sit­u­a­tion, pen­nies must be count­ed and debt must be re­duced.

We would hope that Sports & Games per­form ad­mirably and we will see a new in­come stream.

But FI­FA live in the re­al world, and when they saw this deal (and they would be aware of oth­er as­so­ci­a­tions uni­form deals), they would see a sword of Damo­cles hang­ing over TTFA for four years.

Add to this the po­ten­tial $6 mil­lion con­tract of Ter­ry Fen­wick, along with a myr­i­ad of oth­er coach­ing and staff con­tracts and per­haps In­fan­ti­no felt it was not such a fan­tas­tic debt man­age­ment plan.

Per­haps, a bet­ter, smarter move would have been to sim­ply pur­chase na­tion­al team uni­forms at a dis­count? Buy what you can af­ford and cre­ate re­tail de­mand. Let sports out­lets place or­ders and use their funds to buy the repli­cas.

What is the need, for ex­am­ple, of pur­chas­ing 120 jer­seys for the U13 boys and girls when we don't even know if we can af­ford for them to play an in­ter­na­tion­al fix­ture?

Unit­ed TTFA may be­lieve they have the foot­ball knowl­edge to win match­es, but this deal, for one, ex­pos­es their to­tal ig­no­rance of the busi­ness of foot­ball and the need to con­sult with their board.

Kevin Har­ri­son

Op­er­a­tions Di­rec­tor

Cen­tral F.C.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored