Stadium naming rights

[Ishmael]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

[Guest toonlass]

Really can't see anything wrong with this apart from loosing tradition.  But tradition shouldn't really stand in the way of securing extra finances for the club.

 

 

 

 

 

Care to expand on what it is exactly that I am missing here?

 

Ok bugger tradition. Lets change from black and white stripes to red and white stripes. And lets not play at our traditional newcastle location, lets move to Milton Keynes instead. And Newcastle United sounds too traditional, lets change to something more catchy. Catch my drift?

 

Look I get that people are somewhat upset about loosing tradition, but we need to consider what is best for the club at the moment. 

 

I imagine that many were origionally upset at sponsors names being printed on shirts - but now it is common practice and nobody cares.  It wouldn't suprise me if the selling of stadium naming right expanded significantly over the next decade - so why not move with the times?

 

Also, take a look at what selling stadium rights can potentially earn a team/francise: http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/14/baseball-mets-citigroup-biz_cz_kb_1114naming_slide.html

 

You do know that black and white is not our original strip colour too?  Albeit that we only had red for 2 years, it was still the original kit.  So we moved ahead of the times having a strip which did not class - this was a move for advantageous reasons.

 

Yes I do realise that we had a red strip for 2 years, but two years does not make "tradition". 117 years have been in black and white and that does constitute tradition.

 

To be honest with you, if you really can't see why whoring the name of our stadium is wrong then nothing I can say to you will change your mind.

[Guest icemanblue]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

 

That's what they want you to think.

[relámpago blanco]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

 

That's what they want you to think.

Well we wont see any money in Jan anyway as he isn't selling the rights till the summer, probably expecting us to be back in the prem.  He did say he's looking for 6m which Hughton will get so I assume if we go up his budget will be whatever this stadium bollocks generates.

[Ishmael]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

 

That's what they want you to think.

 

Well anything else would be somewhat illegal, no? 

 

I mean the only thing they can legally do with sponorship money is invest it back into the club.  Whatever means they choose to invest in, of course, is up to them.

[Ishmael]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

 

That's what they want you to think.

Well we wont see any money in Jan anyway as he isn't selling the rights till the summer, probably expecting us to be back in the prem.  He did say he's looking for 6m which Hughton will get so I assume if we go up his budget will be whatever this stadium bollocks generates.

 

Pretty essential that we strengthen the squad to survive, IF we make it back to the EPL. 

 

Basically, we need to ensure our EPL status to ensure the future of the club.  Which selling the stadium naming rights would be a step towards. 

 

Better to loose one aspect of our tradition than the whole club?

[relámpago blanco]

The problem is that too much money is being filtered into the team, via the some of the extravagant wages we're burdened with.

 

Maybe selling the stadium rights will ease that burden and we could potentially see new arrivals in January?

 

That's what they want you to think.

Well we wont see any money in Jan anyway as he isn't selling the rights till the summer, probably expecting us to be back in the prem.  He did say he's looking for 6m which Hughton will get so I assume if we go up his budget will be whatever this stadium bollocks generates.

 

Pretty essential that we strengthen the squad to survive, IF we make it back to the EPL. 

 

Basically, we need to ensure our EPL status to ensure the future of the club.  Which selling the stadium naming rights would be a step towards. 

 

Better to loose one aspect of our tradition than the whole club?

Well what I was trying to say even if he got 6m for it, if thats all he gives HUghton (which it more than likely will be) we'll come straight back down.  We need a 15 goal a season striker, 2 wingers a central midfielder and cover for the defence.  We need about 15m at least.

[Ishmael]

Basically we need a whole new squad

 

But yeah, I agree that £6m wont be anywhere near enough to avoid immediate relegation back to the CCC. 

 

So, people must really come to understand just how important fund raising is for the club currently - by any reasonable means.

[timnufc22]

Why should we believe Llambias? Why should we trust that it wont become the Sports Direct Stadium, with the SJP writing tucked away somewhere?

 

"nothing more than an exercise in public relations." & "NUFC admitted they purposely & continuously mislead the media & fans "

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

its all well and good saying £6m per year is good because we need to invest in the squad, but looking at things do you really expect Pork Scratching to invest this in improving the squad?  I can't help but feel it'll find its way into the back pocket of those 40" jeans.

[relámpago blanco]

its all well and good saying £6m per year is good because we need to invest in the squad, but looking at things do you really expect Pork Scratching to invest this in improving the squad?  I can't help but feel it'll find its way into the back pocket of those 40" jeans.

We wont get 6m a year, the biggest stadium naming deal in sport is in baseball and they get 10M$ per year.  Itll be like 6m for 6 years or something.

[Ishmael]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Ashley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

its all well and good saying £6m per year is good because we need to invest in the squad, but looking at things do you really expect Pork Scratching to invest this in improving the squad?  I can't help but feel it'll find its way into the back pocket of those 40" jeans.

We wont get 6m a year, the biggest stadium naming deal in sport is in baseball and they get 10M$ per year.  Itll be like 6m for 6 years or something.

even worse then.

[relámpago blanco]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Asheley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

Well I am against the Naming rights as I don't think we'll get sufficient funds to make it worthwhile,  we'll be looking at 1m a season or something, its not going to be massive.  I'd still be against it if Shearer was a billionaire and bought the club.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Asheley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

 

Yes, absolutely. The heritage of this club isn't for sale... it's all we have of value.

 

I don't think the future of this club is at risk here, say we miss out on £5m or £6m, will be go bust? I don't think so.

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Ashley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

yes.  There's not need.  A more reputable chairman (slash owner) should be prepared to back his manager financially by other means than selling part of the clubs tradition.

[NG32]

This club generates enough dosh to support itself without the need of seeling the naming rights to some company who is going to gives a couple of million for a few years.

[Wallace]

What gives Newcastle United its unique identity is its relationship with the city and the people it represents.  The people of this area are characterised by our history which because of the remoteness of the region is quite different to most other parts of the country.  It is widely acknowledged that the people up here have a stronger identity with their region and more pride in where they come from than anywhere else in the country.  We are often accused of being insular but history has taught us that if we don't look out for ourselves, no-one else will as few outside of the North East give a toss about this region.  By disconnecting the club from the city and its people, what is left other than a white elephant on a hill?

 

I understand that English football is seen as a global phenomenon but surely one of the things that appeals is the unique identity of most of the clubs. If all clubs are willing to sell anything for a few bob, surely we will end up with identikit clubs with a forgotten history and no connection to their locality in which they are based - in that case, it may as well become like the US where you buy the franchise and the owner moves the club to a new city.

 

[Guest toonlass]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Ashley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

yes.  There's not need.  A more reputable chairman (slash owner) should be prepared to back his manager financially by other means than selling part of the clubs tradition.

 

this

[Ishmael]

Well Arsenal have a £3m a year deal for example. They have one of the largest match day incomes in Europe and yet still opted to sell the stadium naming rights.

 

"It obviously depends on the level of sponsorship that someone comes up and offers us," said Mr Edelman. "But it is also linked to whether we feel the sponsor is appropriate to be associated with the club.

 

"No one in the UK has ever got substantial amounts; maybe less than £1m or possibly £200,000 a year. But it all depends on the level of interest that you get."

 

All I'm saying WBCP is that you should deem this as a valid means of making money.

[relámpago blanco]

Well Arsenal have a £3m a year deal for example. They have one of the largest match day incomes in Europe and yet still opted to sell the stadium naming rights.

 

"It obviously depends on the level of sponsorship that someone comes up and offers us," said Mr Edelman. "But it is also linked to whether we feel the sponsor is appropriate to be associated with the club.

 

"No one in the UK has ever got substantial amounts; maybe less than £1m or possibly £200,000 a year. But it all depends on the level of interest that you get."

 

All I'm saying WBCP is that you should deem this as a valid means of making money.

Aye and what was that stadium called before the emirates?  Also I hardly think a sponsor is going to pay a great deal for us with our performances for the last 5 years.  We'll be lucky to get 1m a season and very lucky at that.

[nufcjmc]

OK, so everyone here who is arguing against Ashley now.

 

If say we had a more reputable chairman and were in the same situation as we currently are - nobody give me the "WE WOULDN'T BE lol" arguement please. Would you all still be against selling the naming rights?  Knowing that it was needed to help secure the future of the club.

 

I think any reputable chairman would understand or at least think before opening their mouths, and then they would never consider selling 100+ years of tradition down the drain as the reaction from the supporters is not worth it. We all knew that we needed to streamline and that would be hard at the end of last season we said goodbye to alot of players and no new investment going back into the first team. Other things have been set in place to bring cash in such as the three year season ticket deals, getting payments for outgoing players in installments and then we have the renewal/sale of the shirt sponsorship money. I personally think that everytime they announce a new way of bringing in "much needed revenue" what they mean is they want to stop having to top up the club with their own money and right now we need over investment above and beyond the basics and this has the potential to reap the most rewards but the "chairman" and owner just dont see this.

[LesPaul]

The emerits stadium sounds so tacky and plastic. It's the sort of thing you extpect in the NFL but not in English football. Although I fully support Nial Quinn if he renames the SOS the Lucky Charms stadium or something javascript:void(0);

[Guest toonlass]

Well Arsenal have a £3m a year deal for example. They have one of the largest match day incomes in Europe and yet still opted to sell the stadium naming rights.

 

"It obviously depends on the level of sponsorship that someone comes up and offers us," said Mr Edelman. "But it is also linked to whether we feel the sponsor is appropriate to be associated with the club.

 

"No one in the UK has ever got substantial amounts; maybe less than £1m or possibly £200,000 a year. But it all depends on the level of interest that you get."

 

All I'm saying WBCP is that you should deem this as a valid means of making money.

 

Arsenal's example is a million miles away from our situatuion though. There stadium was newly built and hadn't been known as anything other than the Emirates. It's not like they changed the name of Highbury for a wedge of cash is it?

[Ishmael]

Ashburton Grove.