Chelsea follow suit

[Happy Face 29]

Chelsea are to sell the naming rights to Stamford Bridge, their home since the club were established in 1905, in an attempt to compete financially with the likes of Manchester United.

 

The controversial move was announced by new chief executive Ron Gourlay, who said Chelsea had to make sure their rivals did not gain a "competitive advantage" through added revenues because their stadiums were bigger.

 

Given the vast wealth of owner Roman Abramovich the announcement is another clear sign that the Russian billionaire is determined that Chelsea become self-sufficient.

 

Chelsea will look for "blue-chip" companies who may wish to take up the rights to rename Stamford Bridge for the next 10 years. However the proposal will come with the proviso that the existing stadium name remains.

 

For example, Chelsea's current shirt sponsors are the South Korean electronics firm Samsung. So if they decided to extend their deal the stadium could be renamed "Samsung Stamford Bridge".

 

Arsenal secured around £100 million when they moved from Highbury by selling the rights to their new stadium to the Emirates airline. That deal lasts until 2021.

 

"Retaining the heritage of the stadium is paramount to considering such a move but we think that it is achievable and on that basis we would enter the discussions over naming rights with the right partner for Chelsea," Gourlay said.

 

"We understand that this is a sensitive issue for our fans and that is why we would keep the name Stamford Bridge in any deal.

 

"What we are not prepared to happen, and I am sure our fans will appreciate this, is allow our rival clubs in England and Europe to gain a competitive advantage over us in terms of the revenue they can generate, through either expanding capacity of their existing stadia or moving to a new stadium and then invest that in their team or club.

 

"Those possibilities are not open to Chelsea for the foreseeable future because of the restrictions in expanding our stadium and the issues around finding a new site, so that means we have to be creative and look at our sponsorship architecture and see if we can create new value and new opportunities that keeps us competitive."

 

Chelsea are not expecting to be able to increase the 41,800 capacity of Stamford Bridge within the next five years – they are hemmed in by planning and building restrictions – and if the naming rights are sold for the next 10 years then it would appear to preclude the opportunity, if one arose, to move to a new stadium.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...lite-clubs.html

 

If ANY Chelsea fan utters a word of complaint they can fuck off. They must be on for half a billion spent over a decade.

Edited November 6, 2009 by Happy Face

[NJS 4446]

It look like they were all waiting for someone to stick their head above the parapet of stupidity before it becomes common - on behalf of football, thanks fat cunt.

[Happy Face 29]

...I'd also point out, if you have to do it, this is how you go about announcing it. You explain the reasons, you tip your hat to the fans and ask that they understand. You assure them the original name will still remain.

 

...you don't say "we're looking to increase revenue so anyone wanting to rebrand the stadium, get in touch" as an afterthought at the end of a press release on a completeley unrelated matter.