Better Red Than Fed?

In some parts of the world, American International Group is better known for a shirt than for a bailout.

That would be the red shirt of Manchester United, soccer champions of England and Europe. A.I.G. signed a four-year, $100 million deal in 2005 to sponsor the team and have its logo on the uniforms. As a result, the logo has been seen by soccer fans all over the world.

With the U.S. government's takeover of the troubled global insurance giant, through a $85 billion dollar loan from the Federal Reserve, United may soon have to find a new sponsor.

Or perhaps the logo on the shirt, as FT Alphaville suggests, should be this.

Despite the credit crunch, A.I.G.'s troubles may actually be a good thing for United, which has also stumbled recently, winning only one of its first three games.

United may be able to raise more money if A.I.G. has to cut short its sponsorship commitment, experts say.

"If Manchester United do have to find a new sponsor, they would almost certainly pay as much and quite probably more," Simon Chadwick, professor of sports business strategy at Coventry University, told Agence France-Presse. "The issue for United would be finding the right sponsor with a global operation as a partner, to give the club global coverage, something A.I.G. does perfectly at the moment."

Finding a new sponsor, however, has not been easy for two smaller clubs in England's top league. Both West Bromwich Albion and West Ham United are playing with corporate logo-less shirts: West Bromwich was unable to find a sponsor for the start of the season, and West Ham's, XL Leisure Group, went into administration, the British equivalent of bankruptcy.

Soccer clubs in England have come to count on shirt sponsorships as an important source of their revenue since Liverpool Football Club signed a £150,00 deal (about $270,000 today) with Hitachi in 1979.

United's fans would probably welcome a new sponsor, in part because it may mean more money. And they would be happier if the new sponsor was not American (sorry, Ben), because of their loathing of the team's American owners, the Glazers. (Previous ManUnited sponsors have been Vodafone of Britain and Sharp of Japan.)

There is a downside, as the Republik of Mancunia blog points out: "Nothing dates a shirt like an old sponsor, so no doubt fans would be rushing out all over the world to purchase exactly the same shirt, but with the new sponsor on it."

(Above, Manchester United players line up before playing Villarreal of Spain on Wednesday. Photograph by Paul Ellis/AFP/Getty Images)

• Wall Fall Down: Who Will Survive the Panic?
• Credit Crunched: A Special Report on the Crisis
• One Market Is Holding Up ... So Far