Yorkie Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. It's definitely a nice touch changing the name back. I was more frustrated by the idea of 'Sports Direct Arena' than the actual execution; cos almost everyone still called it SJP anyway. Considering the majority of the media seemed to retain the old name, whenever it was referred to as the new title it seemed jovial/piss-takey (Lineker, etc). That was the only time it irked me really. I'm not too cynical about it. Wonga not calling it the 'Wonga Stadium', or whatever, just makes a total mockery of Llambias' bullcrap. "By demonstrating how Sports Direct Arena profits from the change is merely an advertisement in itself to other potential sponsors. What a great opportunity it is for yous!" Tit. Total nonsense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I despise Wonga and any pay day loan company . I'm not changing my moral position now they sponsor our shirts. It's wrong that they are allowed to prey on people who are so desperate that they agree to their outrageous terms, and let's be honest , in the current financial predicament that this country is in, they are not short of customers, forlornly attempting to keep their heads above water. It's just plain wrong. whilst I'm with you on this i was also pissed off when folk were creaming their pants over thoughts of nike sponsoring the ground. I'm really struggling to think of any large company i'd like to have us associated with. Greggs isn't all that bad actually if it comes to morals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 How long's Puma got us for, by the by? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The money in doesn't really matter like, it's not as though it's going to change the puny sums we are willing to risk on new players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. Agreed. Wonga is an unknown company over here and the mockup of the shirt some pages back looked a damn sight better than the current one with VM as far as I am concerned. On the other hand I can see why fans living in the UK wouldn't be thrilled about walking around with a replica shirt advertising such a dubious company to be fair. Edit: was on about this: http://i49.tinypic.com/33vyyw3.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/TMNT-Teenage-Mutant-Ninja-Turtles-movie-live-action-2.jpg CowaWonga Dude! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The money in doesn't really matter like, it's not as though it's going to change the puny sums we are willing to risk on new players. That's very populist of you, but if their aim is for the club to be self sufficient it's not irrelevant at all. The same goes for the extra TV money coming in next season. I will give them the benefit of the doubt on this count until proven wrong, although I am well aware they've lied to us before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The money in doesn't really matter like, it's not as though it's going to change the puny sums we are willing to risk on new players. That's very populist of you, but if their aim is for the club to be self sufficient it's not irrelevant at all. The same goes for the extra TV money coming in next season. I will give them the benefit of the doubt on this count until proven wrong, although I am well aware they've lied to us before. Agreed. While it's clear that we will only spend within a pretty tight budget, despite what people like to think the budget has increased over the last couple of years. Any money that comes in is very important. If only to stop us selling players to fund further signings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The money in doesn't really matter like, it's not as though it's going to change the puny sums we are willing to risk on new players. If we'll only spend what we can generate, the money is does matter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Still a despicable company who prey on the vulnerable...ffs great PR move by them though, should never really have got to this... nice for it to be renamed though... can't help but agree with david conn though http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2012/oct/09/newcastle-united-wonga-deal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1185312/newcastle-united-ground-called-st-james%27-park-again?cc=4716 The Magpies have confirmed a four-year sponsorship deal with the online lender beginning at the start of the 2013-2014 season which could be worth as much as £15 million a year, according to some estimates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Does this effectively mean that two Wongs make a right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1185312/newcastle-united-ground-called-st-james%27-park-again?cc=4716 The Magpies have confirmed a four-year sponsorship deal with the online lender beginning at the start of the 2013-2014 season which could be worth as much as £15 million a year, according to some estimates. could be, some and estimates.... I'm hoping for something a tad more conclusive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memphis Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Should every club with commercial associations with businesses of questionable morality be ashamed? Or publicly shamed? Honest question, I am torn on it myself. But there are few companies who are without blemish, even if most aren't as repellent as Wonga. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Should every club with commercial associations with businesses of questionable morality be ashamed? Or publicly shamed? Honest question, I am torn on it myself. But there are few companies who are without blemish, even if most aren't as repellent as Wonga. when you consider they are all playing in the BARCLAYS premier league aswell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I think what's worn on the shirt should reflect the values and ethos the club wants to portray. Clubs always try to make themselves look socially conscious and then do very little of worth to that effect. I don't think it's especially different from the overall trend, no worse than the standard in the league, it's a general problem more than ours, but of course I'd like us to be better than most. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 something mentioned about wongo will "also" pay towards the academy and enterprise foundation, is this outside of the shirt sponsorship deal ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam1 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. Agreed. Wonga is an unknown company over here and the mockup of the shirt some pages back looked a damn sight better than the current one with VM as far as I am concerned. On the other hand I can see why fans living in the UK wouldn't be thrilled about walking around with a replica shirt advertising such a dubious company to be fair. Edit: was on about this: http://i49.tinypic.com/33vyyw3.jpg Thats actually not bad tbh. Its just the word 'Wonga' i fucking hate. If they were called Aon, Standard Chartered, or Investec id be COMPLETELY over the moon, and not just pleased with all this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I still don't get the big deal with Wonga like. Aye, so their interest rates are astronomical? More fool you for agreeing to it, surely? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. Agreed. Wonga is an unknown company over here and the mockup of the shirt some pages back looked a damn sight better than the current one with VM as far as I am concerned. On the other hand I can see why fans living in the UK wouldn't be thrilled about walking around with a replica shirt advertising such a dubious company to be fair. Edit: was on about this: http://i49.tinypic.com/33vyyw3.jpg Thats actually not bad tbh. Its just the word 'Wonga' i f***ing hate. If they were called Aon, Standard Chartered, or Investec id be COMPLETELY over the moon, and not just pleased with all this. why ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Number 9 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I find myself completely willing to overlook how horrible Wonga is in general because they've renamed the stadium. Or maybe that was their plan? Or maybe it was all Mike Ashley's plan to let him get a horrible sponsor in? Ahhh! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam1 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. Agreed. Wonga is an unknown company over here and the mockup of the shirt some pages back looked a damn sight better than the current one with VM as far as I am concerned. On the other hand I can see why fans living in the UK wouldn't be thrilled about walking around with a replica shirt advertising such a dubious company to be fair. Edit: was on about this: http://i49.tinypic.com/33vyyw3.jpg Thats actually not bad tbh. Its just the word 'Wonga' i f***ing hate. If they were called Aon, Standard Chartered, or Investec id be COMPLETELY over the moon, and not just pleased with all this. why ? Because i dont want a shit word across the front of our tops? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't know much about the controversies regarding the company itself, but purely in terms of aesthetics of the brand, i can't see it looking too bad on the shirt tbh. At least it's vaguely symmetrical, rather than just a 'stick this there then stick 'money' next to it' like the current one. It's a bit of a garish colour but meh, can't see it looking so bad. Agreed. Wonga is an unknown company over here and the mockup of the shirt some pages back looked a damn sight better than the current one with VM as far as I am concerned. On the other hand I can see why fans living in the UK wouldn't be thrilled about walking around with a replica shirt advertising such a dubious company to be fair. Edit: was on about this: http://i49.tinypic.com/33vyyw3.jpg Thats actually not bad tbh. Its just the word 'Wonga' i f***ing hate. If they were called Aon, Standard Chartered, or Investec id be COMPLETELY over the moon, and not just pleased with all this. why ? Because i dont want a s*** word across the front of our tops? does it matter what the word is when they are all very dodgy companies. I'd rather have Shit & co on the shirt if it was a reputable company. theres some style over substance going on here, not to mention snobbery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Well, don't have to wonder if I'll end up shelling out for a strip for the next four years, must be the first time these arseholes have actually saved someone money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuneaton Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 id absolutely love to know how much this is worth a year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts