Today, Man United officially launched their 2026-27 home kit, which they will debut in their final two matches this season. However, Adidas are reportedly set to launch, not one, not two, but three more shirts over the course of the summer, which speaks to the dynamics of the deal with the German firm.
As reported by Footy Headlines, an industry outlet which regularly breaks exclusive news in the sportswear sector, Adidas will adopt a red base for the fourth kit, which is likely to be used in domestic cup and Champions League matches as an alternative to the new home shirt.
Typically, when Adidas releases a fourth kit, it is a collectors’ item, a streetwear-adjacent opportunity to take the club in question’s colours and traditional brushstrokes and improvise on them.
More kits equate to more shirt sales, right? Well, yes, probably. But that won’t necessarily mean significantly more revenue for Manchester United themselves because of the structure of the contract with Adidas.
United will reportedly wear FOUR different kits next season
DISCUSS: Naked cash grab or an important commercial opportunity?
Reports suggest that the deal is worth £90m annually to United and runs until 2035. However, that £90m figure is an oversimplification. The reality is that commercial contracts at this scale are never as straightforward as a flat annual fee.
United in Focus has seen numerous copies of agreements between club and manufacturer over the years, obtained from public documentation used in commercial lawsuits and disgruntled former employees looking to highlight a clause that they weren’t happy with, among other sources.
There are hundreds of variables, but the ones that appear universally are:
- Base fee
- Royalty on net sales
- Sales targets with rebate mechanisms triggered if hit
- Annual escalator clause, indexed to inflation or revenue benchmarks
- Sporting performance bonuses
- Break clauses tied to performance
- Ownership change provisions
- Exclusivity across various merchandise categories
While we haven’t seen the terms of the United-Adidas deal, the consensus among experts canvassed by United in Focus is that the £90m base fee is so large that the club almost certainly only earns a very modest amount in royalties per item sold. For other clubs, that’s usually in the 5-10 per cent range, but the Red Devils’ income in this department will be more negligible.
At the start of the partnership, Adidas were reportedly projecting revenues of nearly £1.5bn over the course of the entire deal. And because United’s commission is small, they won’t share in the commercial success of a fourth kit launch to a great extent.
Put simply, United have traded the security of a 10-year, £90m-a-year deal for the potential upside that a bigger cut of sales could have given them. Zoom out on the graph, however, and that looks like a smart move. The club’s cash flow issues are well documented and locking in £90m revenue every season gives the finance department a good base to work with when they are modelling the transfer and wage budgets years in advance.
What do you think of the new Man Utd home kit for 2026/27?
As has been widely reported, Adidas also apply a £10m penalty when United fail to qualify for the Champions League. That’s less because of sales and more because of brand association – Adidas want to be associated with elite, prestige teams. Even in a fallow year, United’s brand is heavily fortified, but Adidas clearly felt the need to include some downside protection. Still, it’s better than the previous iteration of the deal, when a 33 per cent cut applied in the same scenario.
Four kits, a training range and other athleisure items might sound like a lot, but it barely touches the sides on the Adidas website. In total, the firm lists 147 United-licensed items for sale. They are ultimately taking on far more risk than United and want to squeeze as much juice from it as possible.
From that perspective, the commercial logic of releasing a fourth kit – which will likely sell out at £100 per go at the club shop and in Adidas stores worldwide – is sound. The balance, as ever, is saturation and keeping fans from feeling over-commercialised.
Commercial income last season was £333m, a new club-record in a season which was United’s worst on the pitch since the mid-1970s. Retail, merchandise and licensing accounted for £145m of that figure.
And while Ed Woodward was wrong to say that United would keep breaking financial records regardless of sporting performance (prize money is now simply too big a differentiator between the elite clubs), it does seem that commercial income is less indexed to glory on the pitch.
Receive a digest of our best United content each week direct to your mailbox
