Manchester United loses its shirt sponsor.
This story says something about human nature. The core of this story is a message about largesse.
You could argue that for AIG, a shirt sponsorship with Manchester United is either a good business decision or a bad one. It either pays for itself or it doesn’t. More importantly, it is either more profitable than the next best investment idea they have, or it isn’t.
In my tiny layperson’s brain, I can’t understand what fluctuating economic factors could have scuppered the value of an advertising deal. Scuppered the deal itself, sure. But scuppered the value of it?
If it was a smart thing before, it’s probably still a smart thing. Even if the value of the deal has decreased, there’s still the option of sitting at the bargaining table and negotiating a reasonable price based on these times. Surely it was the best possible business decision all along? No, I’m pointing the finger directly at largesse. I know, you’re thinking, “Who would ever accuse bankers of living large?” but I assure you, there’s more than cold business sense going on behind the ManU shirt deal.
You know that somewhere on the links, two banker buddies were chatting…
“I’ve got Manchester United. Who’ve you got?”
When times get tough, largesse is the first thing to go.