COLOGNE (dpa-AFX) - The German Football Association's (DFB) controversial change of supplier from Adidas to Nike was "without alternative" from the association's perspective, according to sports economist Christoph Breuer. "If a non-profit soccer association can virtually double the amount and raise almost 400 million euros more over eight years and invest at least a large part of it in the development of children's, youth and women's soccer, then there is no alternative," the professor at the German Sport University in Koln told the German Press Agency. When you then see "that the once rich DFB has become an association that has to turn over the euro twice, there is even less of an alternative.

Breuer's Bayreuth colleague Markus Kurscheidt expressed a similar view. "If the sums are so far apart, the DFB simply has to act in an economically responsible manner," he told the "Augsburger Allgemeine" (Saturday). If the DFB showed transparently how much of the Nike money benefits youth and amateur soccer, it could "increase understanding for this decision", he said.

Two and a half months before the start of the home European Championships, the DFB surprisingly announced on Thursday that the contract with long-term partner Adidas would expire at the end of 2026 after more than 70 years. From 2027 until the end of 2034, the DFB will be kitted out by US rival Nike. According to a report in the "Handelsblatt" newspaper, citing industry circles, Nike's involvement with the DFB will cost more than 100 million euros per year. Adidas is said to have paid 50 million euros a year to the association to date.

Some sponsorship markets are characterized by special features. "And the sporting goods market is one such special feature. What is special about this industry is that very few companies have a very dominant market position," said Breuer. Nike is the number one in the industry, ahead of Adidas. Puma follows a long way behind.

In such markets, the players not only want to further develop their own brand, but also beat a fierce competitor and "deprive it of an attention platform", said Breuer. They are prepared to pay an additional price. "And the best thing, of course, is to beat the fiercest competitor in the domestic market in a project that has become an essential part of the company's DNA," he added. Adidas is behaving in the same way.

According to Breuer, the reactions from politicians surprised him. "Firstly, that they are evaluating this at all, and secondly, how they are evaluating it," he emphasized. "Because from a welfare economics perspective, two aspects are relevant: Firstly, it should be valued more highly if a non-profit association in Germany has significantly more funds available for charitable work." Secondly, with the shareholder structure at Adidas, "there is not much left of a German company." /clu/DP/nas