Change @ St. James

[Lake Bells tits 1]

Its as simple as asking yourself: " Do I want to give the hard-earned money I hold in my hand, to Mike Ashley so he can continue to turn NUFC into a marketing vessel for Sportsdirect?"

 

Fuck what others do, ask yourself that and you have your answer.

[Kid Dynamite 7031]

The ground's sold out tbh (more or less). People telling those who've already paid not to go is the 'inaction' dressed up as doing something which I'm talking about. We've been over this before like but it's an excuse. You wouldn't be going to games anyway tbh. You say you haven't been since Keegan left but were you going anyway? Did you have a season ticket then stopped going after only two home games or whatever it was? Nah, thought not.

 

I had a season ticket for 2 years. Buying a house stopped that but I was still going to 9-10 games a season and 2-3 away games a season. In the last 2 1/2 years I've been to 1 game. Suckered in by Ashley. I'll not be making that mistake again.

 

Im not sure what these 'I go to more games than you' arguments have to do with our current plight though tbh.

Where did I say I went to more games than you? I've actually given my ticket up (for a few different reasons).

Expecting people who've already paid for a ticket not to go when you haven't bought one and then dressing it up as some sort of noble gesture on your part is what I take issue with. Anyway, we're 3rd and a boycott would be massively counter-productive imo. It won't happen though which you can call apathy if you want but imo in reality is because people love going to the matches and will continue to do so.

 

What about at the beginning of next season then? When we are sporting shirts with Sports Direct on and the fans have a clear choice as to whether they hand over their cash or not?

 

I also enjoy going to games, I love football at all levels whether it be coaching kids, playing on a Sunday, watching Blyth or supporting Newcastle. When I gave up my season ticket I had to pay for games on a month by month basis and still managed to get to more home games than I missed. I don't anymore. That's my noble gesture. I'd much rather be sitting at St James watching the games but for 2 1/2 years I've sat in the local pub watching it on Greek telly with all the local knackers saying Harper looks taller in goal than they remember and playing hell that Ranger isn't starting every game.

 

And you can believe me or not, but the 1 reason I do that is because of Mike Ashley. I also don't shop at Sports Direct anymore, I don't buy an NUFC fleece anymore, I don't pick up a programme anymore. It might be a drop in the ocean to him but at least it makes me feel better and makes me feel like I have a right to be aggrieved when he decides to change the name of our ground after 131 years

[Lake Bells tits 1]

I thought the Norwegian who's never even been to SJP making a comparison with Gandhi was bad enough but fucking hell

 

I guess how big of a fan you are is measured by how many tickets you have bought off Ashley?

I dont really see how slagging off foreigners as " not real fans" makes sense.

 

I dont have any affiliation with the club through my upbringing, but I chose this team when I was 9 years old and have followed it ever since... Im sorry if my status as a foreign fan insults you in any way mate..

You know what I was getting at. You don't go to games anyway so continuing not go is achieving what exactly? I would say it's an empty gesture but it's not even a gesture. I have no issue with foreign fans whatsoever. I take issue with people being hypocrites though.

 

I could go quite often through the norwegian supporterclub, but I dont... for what its worth. A trip for me would be approx 600-700 pounds for a weekend all in I reckon.. with a decent owner I`d probably go 4-5 times a year.

 

Im just offering advice from a general perspective...

Edited November 11, 2011 by Saltwater

[Guest alex]

The pious patter in this thread now btw

[McFaul 35]

Its as simple as asking yourself: " Do I want to give the hard-earned money I hold in my hand, to Mike Ashley so he can continue to turn NUFC into a marketing vessel for Sportsdirect?"

 

Fuck what others do, ask yourself that and you have your answer.

It's more complicated than that, why should they put you off going though, why? I go because I love them not the owners, or the policies I go in hope that they fuck off. We need buying out, 18 months ago I said after PSG were bought out that they were the best investment in world football, after them it's Newcastle. PSG have now been bought out as I predicted and we remain the best investment for a buyer in world football.

[McFaul 35]

The ground's sold out tbh (more or less). People telling those who've already paid not to go is the 'inaction' dressed up as doing something which I'm talking about. We've been over this before like but it's an excuse. You wouldn't be going to games anyway tbh. You say you haven't been since Keegan left but were you going anyway? Did you have a season ticket then stopped going after only two home games or whatever it was? Nah, thought not.

 

I had a season ticket for 2 years. Buying a house stopped that but I was still going to 9-10 games a season and 2-3 away games a season. In the last 2 1/2 years I've been to 1 game. Suckered in by Ashley. I'll not be making that mistake again.

 

Im not sure what these 'I go to more games than you' arguments have to do with our current plight though tbh.

Where did I say I went to more games than you? I've actually given my ticket up (for a few different reasons).

Expecting people who've already paid for a ticket not to go when you haven't bought one and then dressing it up as some sort of noble gesture on your part is what I take issue with. Anyway, we're 3rd and a boycott would be massively counter-productive imo. It won't happen though which you can call apathy if you want but imo in reality is because people love going to the matches and will continue to do so.

 

What about at the beginning of next season then? When we are sporting shirts with Sports Direct on and the fans have a clear choice as to whether they hand over their cash or not?

 

I also enjoy going to games, I love football at all levels whether it be coaching kids, playing on a Sunday, watching Blyth or supporting Newcastle. When I gave up my season ticket I had to pay for games on a month by month basis and still managed to get to more home games than I missed. I don't anymore. That's my noble gesture. I'd much rather be sitting at St James watching the games but for 2 1/2 years I've sat in the local pub watching it on Greek telly with all the local knackers saying Harper looks taller in goal than they remember and playing hell that Ranger isn't starting every game.

 

And you can believe me or not, but the 1 reason I do that is because of Mike Ashley. I also don't shop at Sports Direct anymore, I don't buy an NUFC fleece anymore, I don't pick up a programme anymore. It might be a drop in the ocean to him but at least it makes me feel better and makes me feel like I have a right to be aggrieved when he decides to change the name of our ground after 131 years

pmsl who walks the streets in a NUFC fleece like??!??!!

[Gejon 2]

Great news that all signs in Newcastle will continue to refer to SJP so the name won't be forgotten. Not that it being forgotten is an issue, the club will change the name back when it is sold am sure.

 

Not really got my head round this specious argument that was clearly developed during the embargo period by the nationals that it's ok to rename a stadium if it's moved to a new location. Each one of them rightly pointed out the change in the name dis-respects the history and traditions of the game but then all argued that moving clubs from their traditional homes and changing the stadium name was ok. In what way does moving and renaming the stadium respect the traditions of the game more than renaming it? It seems the nationals used the embargo period to develop arguments that presented this going more against tradition than the recent changes at e.g. Sunderland, Man city, Arsenal. Clearly tradition played a much less important role in those commercial decisions yet it's been presented as the opposite.

 

That's the bit I don't get. In all this talk of destruction of history, for example, Arsenal built flats on their's, Highbury is gone completely. THAT is destruction of history, SJP is and always will be SJP.

 

Actually he may have played a blinder, he's taking all the shit, new sponsor (maybe) comes a long and it becomes FedEx at St James Park, "oooh look they've respected history and brought the name back" acceptance all round. (not that the name will go anywhere anyway).

 

Don't some of these clubs have to move though as their current grounds aren't big enough and they can't develop them? It's still a kick in histories balls but is a bit more understandable imo.

 

It's exactly the same in principle, need more revenue = fuck history.

 

I wouldn't say it's exactly the same, at least a stadium move due to expansion gives more fans a chance to follow their team. Obviously the club will be happy with the increased revenue but put it this way, I doubt the Arsenal fans kicked off as much as we are about this.

[Guest alex]

I've stopped buying NUFC leisure wear btw.

[Lake Bells tits 1]

Its as simple as asking yourself: " Do I want to give the hard-earned money I hold in my hand, to Mike Ashley so he can continue to turn NUFC into a marketing vessel for Sportsdirect?"

 

Fuck what others do, ask yourself that and you have your answer.

It's more complicated than that, why should they put you off going though, why? I go because I love them not the owners, or the policies I go in hope that they fuck off. We need buying out, 18 months ago I said after PSG were bought out that they were the best investment in world football, after them it's Newcastle. PSG have now been bought out as I predicted and we remain the best investment for a buyer in world football.

 

We arent if Mike is asking 3 times the price of what the club is worth .That has been and is the problem and the reason why we will never be sold unless we go down a division. As long as we lie dead in the water around midtable this is the perfect scenario for mike. Keep selling players for a profit, put the money towards running costs, buy players cheap or on the free, sooner or later it is going to make him money.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

I've stopped buying NUFC lingerie.

[Guest alex]

I remember ripping the piss out of the NUFC-branded polo shirts (not the adidas / puma ones etc) and Renton turned up at the Trent the week after wearing one.

[Kid Dynamite 7031]

The ground's sold out tbh (more or less). People telling those who've already paid not to go is the 'inaction' dressed up as doing something which I'm talking about. We've been over this before like but it's an excuse. You wouldn't be going to games anyway tbh. You say you haven't been since Keegan left but were you going anyway? Did you have a season ticket then stopped going after only two home games or whatever it was? Nah, thought not.

 

I had a season ticket for 2 years. Buying a house stopped that but I was still going to 9-10 games a season and 2-3 away games a season. In the last 2 1/2 years I've been to 1 game. Suckered in by Ashley. I'll not be making that mistake again.

 

Im not sure what these 'I go to more games than you' arguments have to do with our current plight though tbh.

Where did I say I went to more games than you? I've actually given my ticket up (for a few different reasons).

Expecting people who've already paid for a ticket not to go when you haven't bought one and then dressing it up as some sort of noble gesture on your part is what I take issue with. Anyway, we're 3rd and a boycott would be massively counter-productive imo. It won't happen though which you can call apathy if you want but imo in reality is because people love going to the matches and will continue to do so.

 

What about at the beginning of next season then? When we are sporting shirts with Sports Direct on and the fans have a clear choice as to whether they hand over their cash or not?

 

I also enjoy going to games, I love football at all levels whether it be coaching kids, playing on a Sunday, watching Blyth or supporting Newcastle. When I gave up my season ticket I had to pay for games on a month by month basis and still managed to get to more home games than I missed. I don't anymore. That's my noble gesture. I'd much rather be sitting at St James watching the games but for 2 1/2 years I've sat in the local pub watching it on Greek telly with all the local knackers saying Harper looks taller in goal than they remember and playing hell that Ranger isn't starting every game.

 

And you can believe me or not, but the 1 reason I do that is because of Mike Ashley. I also don't shop at Sports Direct anymore, I don't buy an NUFC fleece anymore, I don't pick up a programme anymore. It might be a drop in the ocean to him but at least it makes me feel better and makes me feel like I have a right to be aggrieved when he decides to change the name of our ground after 131 years

pmsl who walks the streets in a NUFC fleece like??!??!!

 

You are so fucking easy Stevie

[McFaul 35]

The ground's sold out tbh (more or less). People telling those who've already paid not to go is the 'inaction' dressed up as doing something which I'm talking about. We've been over this before like but it's an excuse. You wouldn't be going to games anyway tbh. You say you haven't been since Keegan left but were you going anyway? Did you have a season ticket then stopped going after only two home games or whatever it was? Nah, thought not.

 

I had a season ticket for 2 years. Buying a house stopped that but I was still going to 9-10 games a season and 2-3 away games a season. In the last 2 1/2 years I've been to 1 game. Suckered in by Ashley. I'll not be making that mistake again.

 

Im not sure what these 'I go to more games than you' arguments have to do with our current plight though tbh.

Where did I say I went to more games than you? I've actually given my ticket up (for a few different reasons).

Expecting people who've already paid for a ticket not to go when you haven't bought one and then dressing it up as some sort of noble gesture on your part is what I take issue with. Anyway, we're 3rd and a boycott would be massively counter-productive imo. It won't happen though which you can call apathy if you want but imo in reality is because people love going to the matches and will continue to do so.

 

What about at the beginning of next season then? When we are sporting shirts with Sports Direct on and the fans have a clear choice as to whether they hand over their cash or not?

 

I also enjoy going to games, I love football at all levels whether it be coaching kids, playing on a Sunday, watching Blyth or supporting Newcastle. When I gave up my season ticket I had to pay for games on a month by month basis and still managed to get to more home games than I missed. I don't anymore. That's my noble gesture. I'd much rather be sitting at St James watching the games but for 2 1/2 years I've sat in the local pub watching it on Greek telly with all the local knackers saying Harper looks taller in goal than they remember and playing hell that Ranger isn't starting every game.

 

And you can believe me or not, but the 1 reason I do that is because of Mike Ashley. I also don't shop at Sports Direct anymore, I don't buy an NUFC fleece anymore, I don't pick up a programme anymore. It might be a drop in the ocean to him but at least it makes me feel better and makes me feel like I have a right to be aggrieved when he decides to change the name of our ground after 131 years

pmsl who walks the streets in a NUFC fleece like??!??!!

 

You are so fucking easy Stevie

Coming from the one person of 2000 members who bites like jaws on the first day after a hunger strike!

[Toonpack 9432]

Great news that all signs in Newcastle will continue to refer to SJP so the name won't be forgotten. Not that it being forgotten is an issue, the club will change the name back when it is sold am sure.

 

Not really got my head round this specious argument that was clearly developed during the embargo period by the nationals that it's ok to rename a stadium if it's moved to a new location. Each one of them rightly pointed out the change in the name dis-respects the history and traditions of the game but then all argued that moving clubs from their traditional homes and changing the stadium name was ok. In what way does moving and renaming the stadium respect the traditions of the game more than renaming it? It seems the nationals used the embargo period to develop arguments that presented this going more against tradition than the recent changes at e.g. Sunderland, Man city, Arsenal. Clearly tradition played a much less important role in those commercial decisions yet it's been presented as the opposite.

 

That's the bit I don't get. In all this talk of destruction of history, for example, Arsenal built flats on their's, Highbury is gone completely. THAT is destruction of history, SJP is and always will be SJP.

 

Actually he may have played a blinder, he's taking all the shit, new sponsor (maybe) comes a long and it becomes FedEx at St James Park, "oooh look they've respected history and brought the name back" acceptance all round. (not that the name will go anywhere anyway).

 

Don't some of these clubs have to move though as their current grounds aren't big enough and they can't develop them? It's still a kick in histories balls but is a bit more understandable imo.

 

It's exactly the same in principle, need more revenue = fuck history.

 

I wouldn't say it's exactly the same, at least a stadium move due to expansion gives more fans a chance to follow their team. Obviously the club will be happy with the increased revenue but put it this way, I doubt the Arsenal fans kicked off as much as we are about this.

 

It's exactly the same, clubs move to generate more money, fan considerations do not enter into it. Do you think the driver for any move is because "we want to let more fans in" or "we want more money".

 

I firmly believe it's the latter, there's a market (revenue stream) there let's expoit it .I don't believe post the move (Arsenal in particular) reduced/maintained the ticket prices to get more bodies in, the extra bodies are milked as far as is possible.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Toonpack

[manc-mag 1]

This is all over the fucking shop for me like. Firstly, on it’s most basic, emotional level it is just an utter, utter kick in the teeth. Then you sort of find yourself asking, well okay, if it'll always be SJP to the fans, are there any circumstances at all where you’d be accepting of a name change-and the club’s argument is perhaps the only one, ie if it was a revenue stream for the good of the club. Only you know that that isn’t actually going to happen because they’re lying about that aspect of it.

 

Then you hear the stuff on here about “renaming was always his intention from the beginning and I’ve always called it that way” etc etc and that’s a load of old shite too, because 1. he’d have done it far earlier and 2. he’s tried to sell the club at least once. Then you hear John Hall being “quoted” on here as saying it was always Ashley’s intention to do this, and then you see him coming out and saying “I’m as surprised as anyone else and it’s wrong etc blah blah”

 

Then it begs the hypothetical question for the ‘just increase revenues and we’ll be back in the Champions League’ element– ie (ignoring the fact the club is lying), would this hypothetically be an acceptable way of raising money if it was ploughed into the club? ie how much are you willing to accept in pursuit of those revenues, because otherwise it is just a case of asking for Ashley subsidies, which is a weak argument.

 

Then theres the fact this is completely unprecedented in English top flight football as a renaming exercise ie it’s not to finance a ground move, it’s not the naming of a new ground, it is simply slapping a logo over 130 years of history and hence it's just a fucking insult.

 

At the end of the day I can’t help but just come to the basic conclusion that it represents cash and hence it’s up for grabs as far as MA is concerned. It is simply THE ONLY factor he considers and literally nothing else is of relevance to him. So we continue to be constantly affected by decisions like this on a whim as and when things opportunistically occur to him. I genuinely can’t think of any other consistent ‘narrative’ than that.

 

Fuck me gently.

[Lake Bells tits 1]

Some Norwegian supporters arguing this is what needs to be done to narrow the gap to the top 4. Tottenham are doing the same with WHL, would you rather have CL fotball and SD arena or SJP and relegation battle, 10 million extra is a player a year, if Cissè comes in december this will all be forgotten bla bla bla...

 

Seems like there is no way to achieve success with the SJP name, and that simply renaming the stadium will do wonders

 

Also the 8-10 million is already earmarked it seems

[Guest alex]

That's about the size of it like manc-mag. I think it underlines one reason why, in the midst of the good work done of late, I'm always worried about the future of the club, i.e. I think he does things on a whim. He's a gambler at heart in my view which makes you wonder if we can build on what we have or if we'll be back to square one on another flip of the coin. O/T a bit, sorry.

[manc-mag 1]

By the way, any of the Sky TV lot coming out and deriding the name change, well thank you and I agree absolutely but you can fuck off quite frankly because at the end of the day this has 'the Sky TV effect' stamped all over it.

[trophyshy 7083]

This is all over the fucking shop for me like. Firstly, on it’s most basic, emotional level it is just an utter, utter kick in the teeth. Then you sort of find yourself asking, well okay, if it'll always be SJP to the fans, are there any circumstances at all where you’d be accepting of a name change-and the club’s argument is perhaps the only one, ie if it was a revenue stream for the good of the club. Only you know that that isn’t actually going to happen because they’re lying about that aspect of it.

 

Then you hear the stuff on here about “renaming was always his intention from the beginning and I’ve always called it that way” etc etc and that’s a load of old shite too, because 1. he’d have done it far earlier and 2. he’s tried to sell the club at least once. Then you hear John Hall being “quoted” on here as saying it was always Ashley’s intention to do this, and then you see him coming out and saying “I’m as surprised as anyone else and it’s wrong etc blah blah”

 

Then it begs the hypothetical question for the ‘just increase revenues and we’ll be back in the Champions League’ element– ie (ignoring the fact the club is lying), would this hypothetically be an acceptable way of raising money if it was ploughed into the club? ie how much are you willing to accept in pursuit of those revenues, because otherwise it is just a case of asking for Ashley subsidies, which is a weak argument.

 

Then theres the fact this is completely unprecedented in English top flight football as a renaming exercise ie it’s not to finance a ground move, it’s not the naming of a new ground, it is simply slapping a logo over 130 years of history and hence it's just a fucking insult.

 

At the end of the day I can’t help but just come to the basic conclusion that it represents cash and hence it’s up for grabs as far as MA is concerned. It is simply THE ONLY factor he considers and literally nothing else is of relevance to him. So we continue to be constantly affected by decisions like this on a whim as and when things opportunistically occur to him. I genuinely can’t think of any other consistent ‘narrative’ than that.

 

Fuck me gently.

 

Good post but I don't agree it's all about cash, I think he likes to flex his power and seek vengeance for his bruised ego. If it was simply about the cash why not do it sooner, why not do it when we were relegated when we 'needed' the cash? I can't believe a company would risk coming in and anyone from 'international branding experts' to the fucking tea lady would say don't do this, no-one will buy it and you'll be hated. He knows this, he's not daft.

 

So it's free advertising to SD and another fuck you to the fans who sing nasty things about him.

 

'Dekka they're still singing that fahkin song!'

 

'Okay boss, I'll have a word with them'...../releases condescending guff

 

'I heard that song again Del Boy! What did I say you specky cahnt!'

 

'I'm sorry Mike, I don't know what else to do.'

 

'I fahkin do, let's do away with St James' Park.'

 

..........

 

Ego's got him all that cash.

[Toonpack 9432]

This is all over the fucking shop for me like. Firstly, on it’s most basic, emotional level it is just an utter, utter kick in the teeth. Then you sort of find yourself asking, well okay, if it'll always be SJP to the fans, are there any circumstances at all where you’d be accepting of a name change-and the club’s argument is perhaps the only one, ie if it was a revenue stream for the good of the club. Only you know that that isn’t actually going to happen because they’re lying about that aspect of it.

 

Then you hear the stuff on here about “renaming was always his intention from the beginning and I’ve always called it that way” etc etc and that’s a load of old shite too, because 1. he’d have done it far earlier and 2. he’s tried to sell the club at least once. Then you hear John Hall being “quoted” on here as saying it was always Ashley’s intention to do this, and then you see him coming out and saying “I’m as surprised as anyone else and it’s wrong etc blah blah”

 

Then it begs the hypothetical question for the ‘just increase revenues and we’ll be back in the Champions League’ element– ie (ignoring the fact the club is lying), would this hypothetically be an acceptable way of raising money if it was ploughed into the club? ie how much are you willing to accept in pursuit of those revenues, because otherwise it is just a case of asking for Ashley subsidies, which is a weak argument.

 

Then theres the fact this is completely unprecedented in English top flight football as a renaming exercise ie it’s not to finance a ground move, it’s not the naming of a new ground, it is simply slapping a logo over 130 years of history and hence it's just a fucking insult.

 

At the end of the day I can’t help but just come to the basic conclusion that it represents cash and hence it’s up for grabs as far as MA is concerned. It is simply THE ONLY factor he considers and literally nothing else is of relevance to him. So we continue to be constantly affected by decisions like this on a whim as and when things opportunistically occur to him. I genuinely can’t think of any other consistent ‘narrative’ than that.

 

Fuck me gently.

 

It is an attempt to generate cash, no more, no less, and as per my point above, is alot less of a destruction of "history" than bulldozing the place. Doesn't make it right, but needs must and all that. The commercial beast won't slow down.

 

Stamford Bridge won't be Stamford Bridge next season.

 

What effects fans most, the change of a name (which fans won't use anyway) or the switch of a game at a late stage to a different day, which has the most REAL tangible effect ?

 

One is accepted with no furore the other starts a war.

 

What's better a multi-year ticket price freeze or the change of a name.

 

How much more would those who go, pay to save the name.

[LeazesMag 0]

Great news that all signs in Newcastle will continue to refer to SJP so the name won't be forgotten. Not that it being forgotten is an issue, the club will change the name back when it is sold am sure.

 

Not really got my head round this specious argument that was clearly developed during the embargo period by the nationals that it's ok to rename a stadium if it's moved to a new location. Each one of them rightly pointed out the change in the name dis-respects the history and traditions of the game but then all argued that moving clubs from their traditional homes and changing the stadium name was ok. In what way does moving and renaming the stadium respect the traditions of the game more than renaming it? It seems the nationals used the embargo period to develop arguments that presented this going more against tradition than the recent changes at e.g. Sunderland, Man city, Arsenal. Clearly tradition played a much less important role in those commercial decisions yet it's been presented as the opposite.

 

That's the bit I don't get. In all this talk of destruction of history, for example, Arsenal built flats on their's, Highbury is gone completely. THAT is destruction of history, SJP is and always will be SJP.

 

Actually he may have played a blinder, he's taking all the shit, new sponsor (maybe) comes a long and it becomes FedEx at St James Park, "oooh look they've respected history and brought the name back" acceptance all round. (not that the name will go anywhere anyway).

 

Don't some of these clubs have to move though as their current grounds aren't big enough and they can't develop them? It's still a kick in histories balls but is a bit more understandable imo.

 

It's exactly the same in principle, need more revenue = fuck history.

The issue here is, this isn't bringing in more revenue.

 

he doesn't get it man Alex. He said he would "revaluate" his views on Mike Ashleys ambitions for the club, he thought we would spend the 35m for Carroll, but instead its been pocketed.

 

The same as money from this name change will go.

 

NUFC is just a vehicle to promote Sports Direct now, this is what he wanted, and there will be more to come yet. The likes of Toonpack etc will defend him until the day he sells, then they will change their position - but by then they will be tired of competing among the dross clubs again, although they won't admit it.

[manc-mag 1]

That's about the size of it like manc-mag. I think it underlines one reason why, in the midst of the good work done of late, I'm always worried about the future of the club, i.e. I think he does things on a whim. He's a gambler at heart in my view which makes you wonder if we can build on what we have or if we'll be back to square one on another flip of the coin. O/T a bit, sorry.

 

Aye, in a nutshell for me.

 

Can't remember who said it but one poster on here used a really good turn of phrase where it's like he's got SD as his 'favourite son' and the Toon just ends up a bit of a whipping boy. It's understandable on the one hand I suppose where you've got someone who is completely unsentimental and one of the two 'sons' has made him a billionaire and the other has (to date) cost him money. It's not to say I think he deliberately devalues the second asset - it's simply just not in his interests to do so - and I think he'll feel he's justifiably cottoned on to a good strategy with the new team financing policies thus far, but the point is something like this where this is no discernible benefit to the club (sorry team positive but it is just a lie, we've got to accept that), it is a hindrance to the galvanizing efforts of other elements within the football club as it sets people (management and fans) against each other once again....and when we're actually playing like a proud football club for fucks sake!

[LeazesMag 0]

This is all over the fucking shop for me like. Firstly, on it’s most basic, emotional level it is just an utter, utter kick in the teeth. Then you sort of find yourself asking, well okay, if it'll always be SJP to the fans, are there any circumstances at all where you’d be accepting of a name change-and the club’s argument is perhaps the only one, ie if it was a revenue stream for the good of the club. Only you know that that isn’t actually going to happen because they’re lying about that aspect of it.

 

Then you hear the stuff on here about “renaming was always his intention from the beginning and I’ve always called it that way” etc etc and that’s a load of old shite too, because 1. he’d have done it far earlier and 2. he’s tried to sell the club at least once. Then you hear John Hall being “quoted” on here as saying it was always Ashley’s intention to do this, and then you see him coming out and saying “I’m as surprised as anyone else and it’s wrong etc blah blah”

 

Then it begs the hypothetical question for the ‘just increase revenues and we’ll be back in the Champions League’ element– ie (ignoring the fact the club is lying), would this hypothetically be an acceptable way of raising money if it was ploughed into the club? ie how much are you willing to accept in pursuit of those revenues, because otherwise it is just a case of asking for Ashley subsidies, which is a weak argument.

 

Then theres the fact this is completely unprecedented in English top flight football as a renaming exercise ie it’s not to finance a ground move, it’s not the naming of a new ground, it is simply slapping a logo over 130 years of history and hence it's just a fucking insult.

 

At the end of the day I can’t help but just come to the basic conclusion that it represents cash and hence it’s up for grabs as far as MA is concerned. It is simply THE ONLY factor he considers and literally nothing else is of relevance to him. So we continue to be constantly affected by decisions like this on a whim as and when things opportunistically occur to him. I genuinely can’t think of any other consistent ‘narrative’ than that.

 

Fuck me gently.

 

you should have agreed with me 4 years instead of slating me, and saved yourself all that hot air you've spouted for all that time, because you are slowly getting the idea [took a long time for a clever chap like you mind, but keep going]

 

Listen to what I say in future.

[Toonpack 9432]

Great news that all signs in Newcastle will continue to refer to SJP so the name won't be forgotten. Not that it being forgotten is an issue, the club will change the name back when it is sold am sure.

 

Not really got my head round this specious argument that was clearly developed during the embargo period by the nationals that it's ok to rename a stadium if it's moved to a new location. Each one of them rightly pointed out the change in the name dis-respects the history and traditions of the game but then all argued that moving clubs from their traditional homes and changing the stadium name was ok. In what way does moving and renaming the stadium respect the traditions of the game more than renaming it? It seems the nationals used the embargo period to develop arguments that presented this going more against tradition than the recent changes at e.g. Sunderland, Man city, Arsenal. Clearly tradition played a much less important role in those commercial decisions yet it's been presented as the opposite.

 

That's the bit I don't get. In all this talk of destruction of history, for example, Arsenal built flats on their's, Highbury is gone completely. THAT is destruction of history, SJP is and always will be SJP.

 

Actually he may have played a blinder, he's taking all the shit, new sponsor (maybe) comes a long and it becomes FedEx at St James Park, "oooh look they've respected history and brought the name back" acceptance all round. (not that the name will go anywhere anyway).

 

Don't some of these clubs have to move though as their current grounds aren't big enough and they can't develop them? It's still a kick in histories balls but is a bit more understandable imo.

 

It's exactly the same in principle, need more revenue = fuck history.

The issue here is, this isn't bringing in more revenue.

 

he doesn't get it man Alex. He said he would "revaluate" his views on Mike Ashleys ambitions for the club, he thought we would spend the 35m for Carroll, but instead its been pocketed.

 

The same as money from this name change will go.

 

NUFC is just a vehicle to promote Sports Direct now, this is what he wanted, and there will be more to come yet. The likes of Toonpack etc will defend him until the day he sells, then they will change their position - but by then they will be tired of competing among the dross clubs again, although they won't admit it.

 

Pocketed !! my favourite Leazes buffonery

 

To do that effectively NUFC have to be succesfull

 

P.S. I never said we would spend the Carroll money, but as ever comprehension remains incomprehensible to you.

[manc-mag 1]

This is all over the fucking shop for me like. Firstly, on it’s most basic, emotional level it is just an utter, utter kick in the teeth. Then you sort of find yourself asking, well okay, if it'll always be SJP to the fans, are there any circumstances at all where you’d be accepting of a name change-and the club’s argument is perhaps the only one, ie if it was a revenue stream for the good of the club. Only you know that that isn’t actually going to happen because they’re lying about that aspect of it.

 

Then you hear the stuff on here about “renaming was always his intention from the beginning and I’ve always called it that way” etc etc and that’s a load of old shite too, because 1. he’d have done it far earlier and 2. he’s tried to sell the club at least once. Then you hear John Hall being “quoted” on here as saying it was always Ashley’s intention to do this, and then you see him coming out and saying “I’m as surprised as anyone else and it’s wrong etc blah blah”

 

Then it begs the hypothetical question for the ‘just increase revenues and we’ll be back in the Champions League’ element– ie (ignoring the fact the club is lying), would this hypothetically be an acceptable way of raising money if it was ploughed into the club? ie how much are you willing to accept in pursuit of those revenues, because otherwise it is just a case of asking for Ashley subsidies, which is a weak argument.

 

Then theres the fact this is completely unprecedented in English top flight football as a renaming exercise ie it’s not to finance a ground move, it’s not the naming of a new ground, it is simply slapping a logo over 130 years of history and hence it's just a fucking insult.

 

At the end of the day I can’t help but just come to the basic conclusion that it represents cash and hence it’s up for grabs as far as MA is concerned. It is simply THE ONLY factor he considers and literally nothing else is of relevance to him. So we continue to be constantly affected by decisions like this on a whim as and when things opportunistically occur to him. I genuinely can’t think of any other consistent ‘narrative’ than that.

 

Fuck me gently.

 

Good post but I don't agree it's all about cash, I think he likes to flex his power and seek vengeance for his bruised ego. If it was simply about the cash why not do it sooner, why not do it when we were relegated when we 'needed' the cash? I can't believe a company would risk coming in and anyone from 'international branding experts' to the fucking tea lady would say don't do this, no-one will buy it and you'll be hated. He knows this, he's not daft.

 

So it's free advertising to SD and another fuck you to the fans who sing nasty things about him.

 

'Dekka they're still singing that fahkin song!'

 

'Okay boss, I'll have a word with them'...../releases condescending guff

 

'I heard that song again Del Boy! What did I say you specky cahnt!'

 

'I'm sorry Mike, I don't know what else to do.'

 

'I fahkin do, let's do away with St James' Park.'

 

..........

 

Ego's got him all that cash.

 

You might be right mate purely on the psychology I don't know. Ego no doubt plays a massive part in everything he does, but I spose if you were being less sentimental about it (in absolutely no way a criticism of you as if you don't experience an emotional reaction to this then you've no business as a fan), you might equally characterise it as 'instinct' rather than ego. Ie "fuck it and screw the consequences, it's got SD written on it so it'll line my pockets". His instinct is pure, unsentimental commercialism.