Barney 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not read the whole thread yet. Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but don't the council own the land/stadium? Can they oppose this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14002 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Only as far as a brown envelope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Like I keep saying, if the plan is to make the club more viable and sound on a business footing then I have no problem with that. It's the lieing, sly, cuntish way in which most of this is done that I fucking despise. The way we are treated like naughty sulky teenagers who don't know what's good for us. Totally agree with Gemmill when he said this is almost a statement by Ashley telling us he's still the daddy and we need to know our place. Wankers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29587 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I don't like this (I don't think am as upset as some to be fair) but it's been on my mind for ages. When you look at the income streams from a business perspective, they are doing everything they can to increase each component; the season ticket deal, the corporate evenings to sell the boxes and trying to improve on the shite £2m a year from northern rock. Hate to say it but it's true, this is consistent with revenue maximisation strategy. Let's just hope as HF and Gemmill have pointed out that its part of a broader strategy to sell the club. However, that certainly bow won't bring the name back. The current SD signage for which the club doesn't receive any consideration, is that part of the revenue maximisation strategy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 41418 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Chez, re your point at the end. I think you're right that it won't revert back to SJP, no company is going to pay to NOT have the stadium named, but right now, I'd be over the moon if someone came in and took the deal, if it meant we didn't have the SD brand plastered everywhere. There's also nothing to stop a company putting the SJP back into the name - The Northern Rock St. James Park is a million times more palatable than SD Arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not read the whole thread yet. Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but don't the council own the land/stadium? Can they oppose this? Good point. Lots of season ticket holders on the council as well, if they did have any power to block it it would def go in our favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6594 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not read the whole thread yet. Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but don't the council own the land/stadium? Can they oppose this? The council own the land, not the stadium. I think that it's being called the Sports Direct Arena isn't coincidence. They're renaming the structure, not the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Aye, that's about the size of it like, SLP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29587 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not read the whole thread yet. Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but don't the council own the land/stadium? Can they oppose this? Good point. Lots of season ticket holders on the council as well, if they did have any power to block it it would def go in our favour. It was discussed the last time the renaming was attempted iirc, the council has no power to stop the renaming of the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holden McGroin 6325 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 They knew no-one was calling it sportsdirect @ St James's Park. Too much of a mouthful. It is absolute madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Anyone else wake up and a for few wonderful seconds think that this was just some silly dream they had during the night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyshinton 59 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 At the moment it islike sitting in a fucking big SD carrier bag which gave me the idea why do we all buy an item froma rival sports shop and bring the carrier to the next match hold them up like the card things. Imagine the look on his mush when there are thousands of JJB bags on display onSky (not JJB I know he owns part) ALL our rivals will be loving this and yes in 5 years or so the names SJP will be a thing of history remembered by the older supporters like the Leazes. Fat cockney cunt we should make his visits to the match as uncomfortable as possible. Sell Colo, sell Tiote this would lead to relegation and he would be stuck with us, to him it would be like being stuck in a lift with Stevie is to Chez. Anyway you need to watch what you wish for. The old man has spoken, by the way I will still keep going to see my team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Does anyone want to produce a list of club football stadium name changes across the globe in the past 20 years? It's shit but this was inevitable and if it's linked to the shirt sponsorship, it would be insane if done for free. I can't prove it will lead to increased commercial income so from that perspective it's a massive piss-take, if it does increase income then it's a sign of the times. PP, am bright enough to know that you railing against the poor financial performance of the club and stating on here that they should be doing everything in their power to to increase that income is consistent with how they have presented this deal. Clearly the assumption is that this is just free advertising but if it's not, then thy are just doing what you said they should be doing. I know you would never have suggested this but you did say they should increase income. I know J69 has already said that even if it does we won't see a penny but operating income (as opposed to player sales) is the basis for the wage bill. I don't like this (I don't think am as upset as some to be fair) but it's been on my mind for ages. When you look at the income streams from a business perspective, they are doing everything they can to increase each component; the season ticket deal, the corporate evenings to sell the boxes and trying to improve on the shite £2m a year from northern rock. Hate to say it but it's true, this is consistent with revenue maximisation strategy. Let's just hope as HF and Gemmill have pointed out that its part of a broader strategy to sell the club. However, that certainly bow won't bring the name back. In the last 20 years. No club bigger than Newcastle United has changed the name of a ground which has been their home for over 100 years. Moving to a plastic bowl like the Emirates is a completely different matter. People can talk about revenues as much as they like, but where is the line drawn? It's almost fair game to change the name of the club if this is accepted which it never will be, thank god by people who value the heritage of Newcastle United Football Club. Shepherd was right last week NUFC is an institution and THE single most important thing in North East life. Would they rename the Tyne Bridge? The Red Bull Tyne Bridge, Pampers Buckingham Palace. It is a disgrace, and the financial value will be minimal and hopefully any potential people interested will be put off by the depth of feeling which will manifest itself over the coming months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holden McGroin 6325 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Nicely announced with our next home game not until 3rd Dec. The fan anger will be dipping by then. Televised as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I don't like this (I don't think am as upset as some to be fair) but it's been on my mind for ages. When you look at the income streams from a business perspective, they are doing everything they can to increase each component; the season ticket deal, the corporate evenings to sell the boxes and trying to improve on the shite £2m a year from northern rock. Hate to say it but it's true, this is consistent with revenue maximisation strategy. Let's just hope as HF and Gemmill have pointed out that its part of a broader strategy to sell the club. However, that certainly bow won't bring the name back. The current SD signage for which the club doesn't receive any consideration, is that part of the revenue maximisation strategy? Nobody knows for sure, one statement from the 2009 accounts relating to activity in 2008 is pretty vague on that and thats what that view is based on. As this is linked to the shirt sponsor are people suggesting this will be done for free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6594 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Does anyone want to produce a list of club football stadium name changes across the globe in the past 20 years? Obviously not definitive to the request but a good starter none-the-less: SPONSORED STADIA IN PREMIER LEAGUE & CHAMPIONSHIP Arsenal: Emirates Stadium Bolton: Reebok Stadium Manchester City: Etihad Stadium* Swansea: Liberty Stadium Stoke: Britannia Stadium Wigan: DW Stadium* Brighton: Amex Stadium Coventry: Ricoh Arena Doncaster: Keepmoat Stadium Hull: Kingston Communications Stadium Leicester: King Power Stadium* *sponsor name has changed or been added since stadium opened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonatine 11136 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Sponsors' cash equates to a new player - Derek Llambias Page last updated at 09:23 GMT, Thursday, 10 November 2011 E-mail this to a friend Printable version Llambias says the club had to move forward and consider stadium sponsorship Newcastle United managing director Derek Llambias says the value of shirt and stadium sponsorship will be enough to bring a new player to the club. The Magpies have changed the name of their St James' Park stadium to the Sports Direct Arena, hoping to sell the combined rights to a new sponsor. "I would hope to generate between £8-10m a year, that will give us another player," Llambias told BBC Newcastle. "To compete we need to go further, we've had a fantastic start." Newcastle are third in the Premier League, having won seven of their opening 11 matches. Llambias added: "The fans want us to buy more players, we need a new striker in January, we'll need replacements in the summer. "We need to give ourselves as much of a chance as possible." Stadium sponsorship is growing in English football, with most new-build venues such as Arsenal's Emirates Stadium and Brighton's Amex Stadium utilising brands to help finance costs. Manchester City completed a deal worth £400m over 10 years to sponsor their existing City of Manchester Stadium with Etihad Airways in July of this year. Similarly to Newcastle's plans, Chelsea are considering the option of selling the naming rights of Stamford Bridge, a venue they have been synonymous with since their formation in 1905. "The history is always going to be there, we need to become part of the history," Llambias said. "Chelsea have come out to say they're going to rename their present stadium. They have a lot of history as well but they actually have an owner (Roman Abramovich) who has more money than God. "We can't compare ourselves with Abramovich, we haven't got that sort of money. If we want to compete with the big boys we have to bring more revenue in." The club's shirt sponsorship deal with north east bank Northern Rock is to expire at the end of the season, and pressure is on to replace the branding in time for next season. "I need to find a new shirt sponsor by the end of December - and that's the latest," added Llambias. "Puma need to put the shirt sponsor on, they're manufacturing, and they would like it last month. "I've got a very small window to sell the shirt and naming rights and, if I have to sell them separately, then I have to sell them separately. "But we must give ourselves the opportunity, this is inviting people to come in." Specky cunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29587 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I don't like this (I don't think am as upset as some to be fair) but it's been on my mind for ages. When you look at the income streams from a business perspective, they are doing everything they can to increase each component; the season ticket deal, the corporate evenings to sell the boxes and trying to improve on the shite £2m a year from northern rock. Hate to say it but it's true, this is consistent with revenue maximisation strategy. Let's just hope as HF and Gemmill have pointed out that its part of a broader strategy to sell the club. However, that certainly bow won't bring the name back. The current SD signage for which the club doesn't receive any consideration, is that part of the revenue maximisation strategy? Nobody knows for sure, one statement from the 2009 accounts relating to activity in 2008 is pretty vague on that and thats what that view is based on. As this is linked to the shirt sponsor are people suggesting this will be done for free? The fact that there are no significant sums in the accounts mentioned as related party transactions leads me to believe that the current branding is not being charged for, it's a reasonable assumption. In two years times I expect us to announce a new shirt sponsor (not SD) and the stadium to remain named as SDA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 "Puma need to put the shirt sponsor on, they're manufacturing, and they would like it last month. Stuck with fucking PUMA too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14002 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Northern Rock is up at the end of the season according to Derek Llambias - which is unusual as they signed a deal till 2014. Are Sports Direct going to show us how to do shirt sponsors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 31847 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 When a company turn up at the door offering to pay X million then it's something to consider, now matter how much I personally am against it. Already, (mainly non-NUFC) people are saying, 'what's the fuss?', 'get with the times' 'increased revenue' etc, etc. All missing the point by a country mile. Could Mr Llambias tell us what kind of time limit Sports Direct are going to be afforded this free advertising for 'helping' NUFC to 'showcase' our stadium? Will our owner be that bothered if companies don't think its worth their money and the potential grief they'll get? This is one of the reasons I'm still a non-match attending, non-fake 'boycoutting' fan. When you aren't a perma trophy winning supporter of a club as rich in heritage and tradition as ours is then the last thing you do is is erode that very tradition as there is no shiny, sparkling things that others refer to as 'trophies' to make up for it. Also, for all those who suggest that we haven't a global appeal, I'd suggest one or two seasons doing well would soon sort that out, not some free advertising for the vain Mr Ashley's pet company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 41418 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Will they make the stadium announcer use their new name? I can see that going down well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Stevie, imo a piece of architecture has far more historical importance than a name. The greatest crime committed against Newcastle's heritage was what happened to Grainger town, to even equate this to that event in terms of importance is hysterical (in the true meaning of the word). If we followed your thinking and used it as a guide to preservation of heritage, we'd be playing at a knackered and unsafe stadium. Knocking down Grainger town was a crime, re-naming a stadium for the duration of this current ownership is small time in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Any kind of protest or boicott may affect the teams performance though. Its a proper catch 22. Ashley is basically holding the team hostage for all kinds of vile dispositions while gently whispering "shhhh you may affect the team" when people start rattling their pitchforks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Will they make the stadium announcer use their new name? I can see that going down well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now