By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 12:22 - Jun 6 by lassel
Yep, front of shirt, product exclusivity at stadium concessions and player use for marketing for £1m a year in total.
Sorry that can't be right. Premier league clubs were getting multi million pound sponsorship deals 10-15 years ago so it must be even more than that now.
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 18:53 - Jun 6 with 2268 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 14:02 - Jun 6 by Stocktake
Sorry that can't be right. Premier league clubs were getting multi million pound sponsorship deals 10-15 years ago so it must be even more than that now.
Your point about PL clubs is the whole point. Pl clubs get big sponsorships because it’s a global product and the sponsorship returns the investment 100x over in earned media.
Clubs like QPR and the team my company sponsors don’t get big sponsorships as nobody outside of us lunatics knows or cares who their sponsor is. And QPR v Preston on a Tuesday night on Sky returns about £4.50 in earned media. Which was my point. Nobody, not even the shadiest money laundering hole of a company is paying millions to sponsor QPR and so the club are agreeing these deals rather than the local builders merchants not out of FFP necessity, but because they simply don’t care about the optics.
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:10 - Jun 6 with 2226 views
Interested to know how many dissenters would prefer a 10% hike on ticket prices instead of the 5% the club went with, if they thought this was ethically better than having a betting shirt sponsor.
Before you answer, perhaps check back to your responses a month ago to the 5% price increase when it was announced.
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:11 - Jun 6 with 2229 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:10 - Jun 6 by stevec
Interested to know how many dissenters would prefer a 10% hike on ticket prices instead of the 5% the club went with, if they thought this was ethically better than having a betting shirt sponsor.
Before you answer, perhaps check back to your responses a month ago to the 5% price increase when it was announced.
Or…. 5% fewer development squad signings and A League punts?
If we get £500k for our front of shirt sponsorship then that is the annual salary for one of our players.
This post has been edited by an administrator
1
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:17 - Jun 6 with 2213 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:11 - Jun 6 by Northernr
Or…. 5% fewer development squad signings and A League punts?
If we get £500k for our front of shirt sponsorship then that is the annual salary for one of our players.
This post has been edited by an administrator
This is precisely the point.
The delta between what the club could get from a respectable/local sponsor vs an online casino, based on what has been touted around here is probably £200k at most.
That is likely one Dev Squad signing or A league punt fewer a year in wages. That’s it.
I stand by my point above, the only reason we’re going with the sponsor who pays the most, in spite of the optics, is to bring in as much revenue as possible to enable our CEO to continue to play football manager. It’s as simply as that.
The club could easily get by on one fewer Dev Squad/A league punt a year.
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:10 - Jun 6 with 2141 views
Well you could both apply the same principle to the 5% ticket price increase.
Bottom line is someone, not us, is already footing the bill for the £1.5mill monthly deficit, some day that same person will say enoughs enough so this club needs to raise money wherever it can on a continual basis.
Agree these bloated dev squads are proving somewhat of a luxury, I don’t like wasting it on that either, but dev squad or no dev squad, we still lose money hand over fist and the club has to make itself more economically stable.
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:14 - Jun 6 with 2133 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 19:10 - Jun 6 by stevec
Interested to know how many dissenters would prefer a 10% hike on ticket prices instead of the 5% the club went with, if they thought this was ethically better than having a betting shirt sponsor.
Before you answer, perhaps check back to your responses a month ago to the 5% price increase when it was announced.
It's not a choice between a dodgy sponsor or season ticket hikes though is it Steve?
This sponsorship isn't going to come even close to the money that we've spent on any of Saito, Dembele or probably even Hayden.
1
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:19 - Jun 6 with 2110 views
If the club released a shirt without a sponsor or manufacturer's logo would the additional sales from a unique / classical shirt outweigh the lost sponsorship?
Google says Championship clubs generally get between £300k and £1m for front of shirt sponsor.
Lets be generous and say we get £750k for Mr Queef or whatever it's called:
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:10 - Jun 6 by stevec
Well you could both apply the same principle to the 5% ticket price increase.
Bottom line is someone, not us, is already footing the bill for the £1.5mill monthly deficit, some day that same person will say enoughs enough so this club needs to raise money wherever it can on a continual basis.
Agree these bloated dev squads are proving somewhat of a luxury, I don’t like wasting it on that either, but dev squad or no dev squad, we still lose money hand over fist and the club has to make itself more economically stable.
We lose that amount of money because of player wages. That’s it.
Charging kids £100 each instead of nothing will pay for Hevertton Santos, for a couple of months.
Doing a deal with an online casino will pay for Richard Kone, for a year, maybe.
The club are making a choice, and it’s fine in most people’s eyes, because we want more signings, more players.
When the person currently paying £1.5m a month to keep this show on the road eventually decides that’s enough, we won’t be saved by a good sponsorship deal, nor hung by giving free tickets to kids. We’ll be buried by a squad that finishes 15th in the Championship and pulls £20m+ in salaries.
9
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:39 - Jun 6 with 2045 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:19 - Jun 6 by BazzaInTheLoft
I wonder....
If the club released a shirt without a sponsor or manufacturer's logo would the additional sales from a unique / classical shirt outweigh the lost sponsorship?
Google says Championship clubs generally get between £300k and £1m for front of shirt sponsor.
Lets be generous and say we get £750k for Mr Queef or whatever it's called:
Google says a club our size currently sell between 10,000 and 25,000 each season. The upper end of that swallows a sponsorship fee.
A clever campaign (like the Venezia one) would sell that many shirts I reckon. Not sure how we would do it every season though.
So many clever and unique ways to keep the show on the road without selling your soul.
[Post edited 6 Jun 20:25]
The overwhelming majority of the revenue from kit sales go to the manufacturer. The club get paid a lump sum to allow the manufacturer to produce the shirt.
Going without a sponsor is just straight lost revenue to a club.
1
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:43 - Jun 6 with 2036 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:19 - Jun 6 by BazzaInTheLoft
I wonder....
If the club released a shirt without a sponsor or manufacturer's logo would the additional sales from a unique / classical shirt outweigh the lost sponsorship?
Google says Championship clubs generally get between £300k and £1m for front of shirt sponsor.
Lets be generous and say we get £750k for Mr Queef or whatever it's called:
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:39 - Jun 6 by lassel
The overwhelming majority of the revenue from kit sales go to the manufacturer. The club get paid a lump sum to allow the manufacturer to produce the shirt.
Going without a sponsor is just straight lost revenue to a club.
That's mental.
Why don't clubs band together and make them in house?
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:44 - Jun 6 with 2034 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:39 - Jun 6 by lassel
The overwhelming majority of the revenue from kit sales go to the manufacturer. The club get paid a lump sum to allow the manufacturer to produce the shirt.
Going without a sponsor is just straight lost revenue to a club.
And an even fairer point!
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:47 - Jun 6 with 2024 views
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 20:47 - Jun 6 by stevec
I’m impressed Baz.
Football does bleed money through a lack of foresight.
They might not be your cup of tea Steve, and certainly harder to do at our level, but Clapton CFC brought their ground through an amazing shirt sales campaign:
(9 minutes 40 seconds in)
1
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 21:24 - Jun 6 with 1960 views
Watching England v NZ. F*ck me, even those GPS tracking vests under their shirts have got sponsors logos on them. Just caught a glimpse when Rashford lifted his shirt for a split second to wipe some sweat off his face.
Edit: Are ours sponsored? Missing a trick if they’re not.
[Post edited 6 Jun 21:59]
0
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 22:18 - Jun 6 with 1865 views
I am writing as a supporter to express my disappointment at the club’s new front‑of‑shirt partnership with online casino MrQ.
QPR should not normalise gambling through front‑of‑shirt sponsorship. I understand the commercial pressures on football clubs, particularly outside the Premier League, and that sponsorship income matters. But using a gambling company as the main shirt sponsor again feels like another step in the wrong direction for the club’s identity.
Football already has a difficult relationship with gambling. Supporters are surrounded by betting advertising, odds, promotions and casino brands across the game. For QPR to put an online casino on the front of the shirt adds to that environment and sends a message that this is something the club is comfortable promoting.
I was also particularly disappointed by the way the announcement was promoted on Instagram. The AI‑generated post showing the seats changed to read “MrQ” used the Stan Bowles Stand as a backdrop. Stan’s gambling addiction and the harm it caused him were open knowledge, and we renamed Ellerslie Road in his honour. Using that part of the ground as the visual setting for a casino advert felt, at best, insensitive.
It was also notable that such a significant decision about the club’s public identity was announced at 4pm on a Friday afternoon, a timing more often associated with minimising scrutiny of contentious news than with inviting engagement from supporters.
This is not just about whether the sponsorship is legally allowed. It is about what the club chooses to normalise, promote and attach to its identity.
I would also like the club to consider a practical alternative for supporters who do not want to wear gambling branding. Other clubs with gambling sponsors have offered sponsor‑free adult shirts, and football’s Code of Conduct for Gambling Related Agreements (clause 3.5.2) expects mechanisms that enable supporters to purchase adult replica kits without gambling sponsorship logos where they are not otherwise available. I would willingly pay an extra £5 for an adult shirt without the front‑of‑shirt sponsor, and I suspect I am not the only supporter who feels this way.
A sponsor‑free adult retail option would not undo the sponsorship deal, but it would show some respect for supporters who are uncomfortable advertising an online casino when they wear the shirt.
I would be grateful if the club could explain whether a sponsor‑free adult shirt option is being considered for the 2026/27 season and, more broadly, whether the club intends to move away from gambling companies as front‑of‑shirt sponsors in the future.
New Front of Shirt Sponsor on 02:07 - Jun 7 by E17hoop
Drafted an email to send to the club:
Dear QPR,
I am writing as a supporter to express my disappointment at the club’s new front‑of‑shirt partnership with online casino MrQ.
QPR should not normalise gambling through front‑of‑shirt sponsorship. I understand the commercial pressures on football clubs, particularly outside the Premier League, and that sponsorship income matters. But using a gambling company as the main shirt sponsor again feels like another step in the wrong direction for the club’s identity.
Football already has a difficult relationship with gambling. Supporters are surrounded by betting advertising, odds, promotions and casino brands across the game. For QPR to put an online casino on the front of the shirt adds to that environment and sends a message that this is something the club is comfortable promoting.
I was also particularly disappointed by the way the announcement was promoted on Instagram. The AI‑generated post showing the seats changed to read “MrQ” used the Stan Bowles Stand as a backdrop. Stan’s gambling addiction and the harm it caused him were open knowledge, and we renamed Ellerslie Road in his honour. Using that part of the ground as the visual setting for a casino advert felt, at best, insensitive.
It was also notable that such a significant decision about the club’s public identity was announced at 4pm on a Friday afternoon, a timing more often associated with minimising scrutiny of contentious news than with inviting engagement from supporters.
This is not just about whether the sponsorship is legally allowed. It is about what the club chooses to normalise, promote and attach to its identity.
I would also like the club to consider a practical alternative for supporters who do not want to wear gambling branding. Other clubs with gambling sponsors have offered sponsor‑free adult shirts, and football’s Code of Conduct for Gambling Related Agreements (clause 3.5.2) expects mechanisms that enable supporters to purchase adult replica kits without gambling sponsorship logos where they are not otherwise available. I would willingly pay an extra £5 for an adult shirt without the front‑of‑shirt sponsor, and I suspect I am not the only supporter who feels this way.
A sponsor‑free adult retail option would not undo the sponsorship deal, but it would show some respect for supporters who are uncomfortable advertising an online casino when they wear the shirt.
I would be grateful if the club could explain whether a sponsor‑free adult shirt option is being considered for the 2026/27 season and, more broadly, whether the club intends to move away from gambling companies as front‑of‑shirt sponsors in the future.
The main front-of-shirt sponsors for the 2025/26 campaign include:
Arsenal: Emirates (Airline) Aston Villa: Betano (Gambling) Bournemouth: bj88 (Gambling) Brentford: Hollywoodbets (Gambling) Brighton & Hove Albion: American Express (Banking/Finance) Chelsea: IFS (AI & Enterprise Software) 3Crystal Palace: NET88 (Gambling) Everton: Stake.com (Gambling) Fulham: SBOTOP (Gambling) Liverpool: Standard Chartered (Banking) Manchester City: Etihad Airways (Airline) Manchester United: Snapdragon (Technology/Qualcomm) Newcastle United: Sela (Events/Entertainment) Nottingham Forest: Bally's Corporation (Gambling) Tottenham Hotspur: AIA (Insurance) West Ham United: BoyleSports (Gambling) Wolverhampton Wanderers: DEBET (Gambling)
Hardly unusual, however i read 2026/27 premier league season, gambling firms are temporarily banned from front of shirt sponsors, voted for by the clubs, but for one season only
Is it any worse than alcohol sponsors - like our iconic "Guinness" shirt ?
People with addictions in both, its a real issue, people who do both as occasional hobbies who know when to stop, its not. We are a money operating business, and if everyone else does it, i guess i understand.
i dont neccessarily agree with it myself also on moral grounds - strange that tobacco sponsors completely eliminated now also yet gambling ones amazingly common.
Football is a dirty money sport anyhow.
I think a clever move by Nourry is being heavily linked with tech companies and particularly AI, its where the next billionaire businesses will be.
Would not be surprised that all the gambling firms will then be replaced by AI sponsors. Again, you could say "dirty money" again, as there will be many darker aspects of AI, that will negatively affect the world and business, but football operates totally on ridiculous money systems, now so i understand the sponsorship choices without liking them in anyways
I usually only buy a shirt if I really like the design, the sponsor rarely means anything to me. Compaq, KLM and Guinness are the only exceptions that immediately come to mind. It is nice though if the sponsor is a local business or the owners Rangers fans.
If you had asked me last week who Mr Q were I wouldn't have had a clue, I am not a gambler. But I do fully understand the reaction of some fans here about the announcement, having an addiction on the front of our shirts is not a good look and I would support any fan action regarding this.
I will say this though, I wonder how many decent offers the club had on the table? I have no idea of course but about twenty years ago I was invited by the then CEO to help find a shirt sponsor to compete with their existing offer. Offer being the correct word as the club literally had one decent offer.
The Cubefinder sponsorship announcement piqued my interest. They are sponsoring the training gear once again but next season they will also feature on the left sleeve of the first team shirts. Going to look a little messy with the Sky Bet logo as well. Fans are charged for the addition of the Sky Bet logos when buying a shirt but I presume we won't have to pay for the Cubefinder logo?
If the left sleeve was available for sponsorship presumably the right sleeve, shirt back and shorts are also available? That got me thinking about some South American football shirts years ago that had multiple sponsors on them. The shirts looked like something out of Formula One rather than football. So just now I had a quick look at some shirts from last season.
Boca Juniors. Lovely looking shirt with a gambling company as the main sponsor on the front and a TV company on the back. Some shirts have a different sponsor on each sleeve. Love the third shirt, sorry I don't know how to post photos.
Santos, don't like the shirt but again a gambling company as the main sponsor on the front with two smaller sponsors above the main. A larger sponsor logo bottom front, two sponsors on the back and the same sponsor on both sleeves.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.