Virgin Stadium?

[The Fish 10674]

I just feel sorry Shola in all of this. He's had it all his career.

 

First Carl Cort, now Ba?

 

Poor bastard

 

 

-= Justice for the Fenham Pele =-

[Guest Your Name Here]

Apologies for the naive immaturity. Hadn't realised the groundshift this reprasented. My brain keeps listening to my eyes rather than you Chez.

Its not a groundshift, just confirmation that you get carried away with yourself and talk shit sometimes. So do i tbf.

 

Always happy to pipe up when I've got something wrong. I quoted myself 6 pages ago on what I said about shirt sponsorship back in the day. Though my conclusion - sports direct on the shirts - was shit, I was hardly carried away with anything, I was in 2 minds on it and could see it going either way...it's gone the way I'd thought initially, which was to keep SD away from shirts and not harm the sales of them.

 

I've never said Ashley will always spurn income in favour of promoting Sports Direct. He's not averse to taking the hit of lost income in favour of brand exposure though.

Its not just your views on whether SD would go on the shirts, its your views on how they run the club and assumptions behind that which are (or should be) questioned by this deal. You've been very vocal about the overall strategy and vision for NUFC and as far as i can tell, SD on the shirts was the logical conclusion from that global view. I may be being unfair on you though, just the impression i got.

 

If he doesnt want to harm shirt sales, then he is revenue maximising at NUFC which means the tax efficiency and commercial reasons for transferring cash from SD to NUFC for all branding would hold. A major point you argued against iirc.

If SD became shirt sponsors supporters would ask how much the deal was worth, and fuck all would be an answer that proved beyond doubt the club are being exploited and not even the most naive fuckwit could deny it. Avoiding this problem doesn't prove any of the shit you have been spouting in this thread.

 

When the naming rights to the stadium are exchanged for money you might have a point, until then you don't.

[ChezGiven 0]

Apologies for the naive immaturity. Hadn't realised the groundshift this reprasented. My brain keeps listening to my eyes rather than you Chez.

Its not a groundshift, just confirmation that you get carried away with yourself and talk shit sometimes. So do i tbf.

 

Always happy to pipe up when I've got something wrong. I quoted myself 6 pages ago on what I said about shirt sponsorship back in the day. Though my conclusion - sports direct on the shirts - was shit, I was hardly carried away with anything, I was in 2 minds on it and could see it going either way...it's gone the way I'd thought initially, which was to keep SD away from shirts and not harm the sales of them.

 

I've never said Ashley will always spurn income in favour of promoting Sports Direct. He's not averse to taking the hit of lost income in favour of brand exposure though.

Its not just your views on whether SD would go on the shirts, its your views on how they run the club and assumptions behind that which are (or should be) questioned by this deal. You've been very vocal about the overall strategy and vision for NUFC and as far as i can tell, SD on the shirts was the logical conclusion from that global view. I may be being unfair on you though, just the impression i got.

 

If he doesnt want to harm shirt sales, then he is revenue maximising at NUFC which means the tax efficiency and commercial reasons for transferring cash from SD to NUFC for all branding would hold. A major point you argued against iirc.

If SD became shirt sponsors supporters would ask how much the deal was worth, and fuck all would be an answer that proved beyond doubt the club are being exploited and not even the most naive fuckwit could deny it. Avoiding this problem doesn't prove any of the shit you have been spouting in this thread.

 

When the naming rights to the stadium are exchanged for money you might have a point, until then you don't.

Bit of a strange post that for your usually well argued standards.

 

If SD were the new shirt sponsors rather than Virgin, it would be clear that SD's interests always come above NUFC's as it would be fairly evident that it would be for free. The point of this deal is to highlight that perhaps thats not the case. Maybe it came over as overstating something simple with the discussion with HF. I just find this deal interesting as it challenges the idea that revenue streams in NUFC are secondary to driving any type of promotion possible for SD.

 

If SD brand awareness always trumps NUFC's revenue concerns then Ashley would have put SD branding on the shirts, despite the effect on shirt sales (as this is implicitly not important to him). Putting Virgin branding on the shirts shows that revenue maximisation is a driver of business decisions within the club, thus undermining the more cynical narratives about his objectives.

 

I choose my words carefully as no debate in these circumstances is ever won as no one is privvy to boardroom decision-making.

[Happy Face 29]

One could similarly say....

 

 

If NUFC's revenue always trumps SD brand awareness concerns then Ashley would not have put SD branding on the stadium, despite the effect on ticket sales. Putting SD branding on the stadium shows that SD product placement is a driver of business decisions within the club, thus undermining the more NUFC friendly narratives about his objectives.

 

You and Manc seem to be saying this shirt moves goes to show he's never had any interests at heart except whats best for NUFC. I'm saying he tries to balance the two but often tips towards SD to the detriment of the NUFC brand and balance sheet.

[Barney 0]

 

I think I see what they did there. Very clever.

[ewerk 30167]

Well that doesn't look shit at all.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Bet they're ruined the otherwise excellent third shirt as well.

[manc-mag 1]

One could similarly say....

 

 

If NUFC's revenue always trumps SD brand awareness concerns then Ashley would not have put SD branding on the stadium, despite the effect on ticket sales. Putting SD branding on the stadium shows that SD product placement is a driver of business decisions within the club, thus undermining the more NUFC friendly narratives about his objectives.

 

You and Manc seem to be saying this shirt moves goes to show he's never had any interests at heart except whats best for NUFC. I'm saying he tries to balance the two but often tips towards SD to the detriment of the NUFC brand and balance sheet.

 

No, what I was saying is that people who have clearly expressed the view that everything is SD marketing driven as some sort of masterplan/main reason for buying the club (ps and has been from day one) and that that would also convert to 'free' shirt sponsorship in due course have been proved wrong at the very least in terms of how all encompassing they thought that was. This is not me saying he's getting more NUFC focussed and that money will be made available to the manager, but it is me saying it's evidence against everything being SD driven. A masterplan is a masterplan and it was either his intention to give the shirt sponsorship to SD for 'free' or it wasn't. This very much suggests it wasn't.

 

So it's an income stream which will flow back into the club, how he makes it available is another matter. Previously it was predicted it was a traditional income stream he was closing down to the club for the benefit of SD. That proved to not be the case.

 

The stadium stuff didnt exist as an income stream in the past. The 'story'/sales pitch is he would sell it to sponsors if they came forward. We're led to believe they havent come forward, hence the 'SDA' shite. We can't know for certain one way or another what the truth is but the Etihad/The Emirates, were both shirt and ground combo deals. If it was a masterplan, that's probably what he would have done re: SD imho, as it happens it looks like he's just flogged the shirt for what he could get for it. Perhaps that suggests he'd do the same with the stadium too.

[ewerk 30167]

It also suggests to me that there wasn't a sponsor to be found who wanted to touch the stadium naming rights.

[manc-mag 1]

It also suggests to me that there wasn't a sponsor to be found who wanted to touch the stadium naming rights.

 

Which is what Chez said, and which I'm also inclined to suspect may be the truth.

 

Other companies might have been concerned about the negative backlash, he's not arsed in the slightest though as he doesnt have an ounce of sentimentality in him. It was a billboard that wasn't being used, it'd never brought any money in, so flog it. Basically either free money flowing in or SD 'awareness', can't lose either way when you've got that mindset.

[Guest Your Name Here]

Apologies for the naive immaturity. Hadn't realised the groundshift this reprasented. My brain keeps listening to my eyes rather than you Chez.

Its not a groundshift, just confirmation that you get carried away with yourself and talk shit sometimes. So do i tbf.

 

Always happy to pipe up when I've got something wrong. I quoted myself 6 pages ago on what I said about shirt sponsorship back in the day. Though my conclusion - sports direct on the shirts - was shit, I was hardly carried away with anything, I was in 2 minds on it and could see it going either way...it's gone the way I'd thought initially, which was to keep SD away from shirts and not harm the sales of them.

 

I've never said Ashley will always spurn income in favour of promoting Sports Direct. He's not averse to taking the hit of lost income in favour of brand exposure though.

Its not just your views on whether SD would go on the shirts, its your views on how they run the club and assumptions behind that which are (or should be) questioned by this deal. You've been very vocal about the overall strategy and vision for NUFC and as far as i can tell, SD on the shirts was the logical conclusion from that global view. I may be being unfair on you though, just the impression i got.

 

If he doesnt want to harm shirt sales, then he is revenue maximising at NUFC which means the tax efficiency and commercial reasons for transferring cash from SD to NUFC for all branding would hold. A major point you argued against iirc.

If SD became shirt sponsors supporters would ask how much the deal was worth, and fuck all would be an answer that proved beyond doubt the club are being exploited and not even the most naive fuckwit could deny it. Avoiding this problem doesn't prove any of the shit you have been spouting in this thread.

 

When the naming rights to the stadium are exchanged for money you might have a point, until then you don't.

Bit of a strange post that for your usually well argued standards.

 

If SD were the new shirt sponsors rather than Virgin, it would be clear that SD's interests always come above NUFC's as it would be fairly evident that it would be for free. The point of this deal is to highlight that perhaps thats not the case. Maybe it came over as overstating something simple with the discussion with HF. I just find this deal interesting as it challenges the idea that revenue streams in NUFC are secondary to driving any type of promotion possible for SD.

 

If SD brand awareness always trumps NUFC's revenue concerns then Ashley would have put SD branding on the shirts, despite the effect on shirt sales (as this is implicitly not important to him). Putting Virgin branding on the shirts shows that revenue maximisation is a driver of business decisions within the club, thus undermining the more cynical narratives about his objectives.

 

I choose my words carefully as no debate in these circumstances is ever won as no one is privvy to boardroom decision-making.

I’m sure he’d like to have SD on the shirt but not even the most pro Ashley sympathiser would accept getting zero money for a shirt sponsorship deal. SD either pay for a shirt deal or they get one for nowt and claims the club is being exploited for SD’s benefit become irrefutable. The VM deal therefore becomes less of sign of good intent and more a way of keeping a lid on an inconvenient truth?

 

Renaming the ground is a far clearer indicator and on that front it’s obvious which way the wind is currently blowing. Prostituting your heritage to the lowest bidder isn’t in NUFC interests.

[Cumberland_Sausage 0]

Its a bit funny that name Virgin Money, ironic as well consider there are nee Virgins in Newcastle and there isn't much money either!