New Beginnings Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 Forget that this is absolute genius Get it trending everywhere https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10117621/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Newcastles-Saudi-money-worse-cash-bunch-white-guys-America.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 I think in 2-3 years sponsorship can be offered to external companies at tender. In effect, PIF saying to the corporate world “We’re prepared to offer (maximum market value) to sponsor our team, who wants to bid more and be on the Toon top?” Then you get legal, above market value and seperate sponsorship? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, New Beginnings said: Theyve just showed that clip on SSN with the smug presenter inferring there's clearly no separation This is relentless! Getting excited because the bloke referred to it as "we". He also referred to PIF as "they" but they never mentioned or showed that bit in the interests of inbalance Edited October 22, 2021 by Wolfcastle Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 1 hour ago, New Beginnings said: Forget that this is absolute genius Get it trending everywhere https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10117621/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Newcastles-Saudi-money-worse-cash-bunch-white-guys-America.html Done that, throughout my "Skyscraper City" world Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 2 hours ago, nbthree3 said: Latest from Hope https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10118099/Newcastles-Saudi-owners-consider-selling-naming-rights-St-James-Park-fans-blessing.html Newcastle's Saudi-led owners are considering plans to sell naming rights to St James’ Park —but would only do so with the consent of supporters. This comes after Saudi Arabia’s finance minister, Mohammed Al-Jadaan, spoke of the club becoming a ‘serious competitor’ in the Premier League. Sportsmail understands that a sponsorship deal involving the stadium has been discussed as one avenue of increasing revenue and, subsequently, spending power within the league’s financial fair play regulations. Supporters would also be consulted and asked if they could live with stadium sponsorship, if it meant more money coming into the club. A Saudi Arabian airline has been suggested as one option for a commercial partnership. Newcastle, meanwhile, are said to be relaxed about a temporary Premier League ban on sponsorship involving parties already connected to the ownership of a club, which was voted through by 18 of their 20 top-flight rivals at a meeting on Monday. The club believe the amendment is unlawful and should not pose a threat to their long-term commercial opportunities. Not for me, Geoff. Interested to see how the wider fanbase feels about this though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 33 minutes ago, manorpark said: Done that, throughout my "Skyscraper City" world I never got to thank you Manor. You kept my spirits up during the takeover saga. I also honestly believed it was going to happen (arseholes now looking at my history). Thank you so much. Did you ever receive apologies? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 I’m for it. we need to raise revenue because of FFP. I really want us to stick it to the so called big 6 who are doing everything they can to make the league as uncompetitive as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, r0cafella said: I’m for it. we need to raise revenue because of FFP. I really want us to stick it to the so called big 6 who are doing everything they can to make the league as uncompetitive as possible. Without a doubt, if we want to seriously think about challenging and winning stuff then we have to make sure we increase revenue via sponsorship and commercial deals to combat FFP. I think people forget that John Hall’s first choice was to move stadium. It’s the modern game now and you have to increase revenue to even think of moving forward as we’re miles behind. The new owners are doing it correctly by asking the support and keeping the St James’ Park within the naming rights. It’s a definite yes from me and judging by the majority of responses I’ve seen from long term supporters in my family and friends group and even through social media, looks like they will get the majority support for this. I also think ultimately in the not too distant future, that there will be a new stadium due to the restrictions of extending the stadium for limited additional capacity. Edited October 22, 2021 by et tu brute Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, nbthree3 said: Latest from Hope https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10118099/Newcastles-Saudi-owners-consider-selling-naming-rights-St-James-Park-fans-blessing.html Newcastle's Saudi-led owners are considering plans to sell naming rights to St James’ Park —but would only do so with the consent of supporters. This comes after Saudi Arabia’s finance minister, Mohammed Al-Jadaan, spoke of the club becoming a ‘serious competitor’ in the Premier League. Sportsmail understands that a sponsorship deal involving the stadium has been discussed as one avenue of increasing revenue and, subsequently, spending power within the league’s financial fair play regulations. Supporters would also be consulted and asked if they could live with stadium sponsorship, if it meant more money coming into the club. A Saudi Arabian airline has been suggested as one option for a commercial partnership. Newcastle, meanwhile, are said to be relaxed about a temporary Premier League ban on sponsorship involving parties already connected to the ownership of a club, which was voted through by 18 of their 20 top-flight rivals at a meeting on Monday. The club believe the amendment is unlawful and should not pose a threat to their long-term commercial opportunities. No, absolutely not. If they build a new stadium though, then I have no problem with it Edited October 22, 2021 by Thomson Mouse Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWN Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Never been too precious about the name , see how it goes . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) Wonder how they will get a vote on it? Not the Trust as they’re only concerned about their ‘members’, not a public vote as you will get other clubs fans and mackems voting, so I would guess it would be carried out using the club’s own membership. Edited October 22, 2021 by et tu brute Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Couldn’t give a single shit if they rename the ground to maximise commercial opportunities as long as they keep SJP in there. When Ashley did it you knew we weren’t getting a penny for it and he did it just to take the piss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 1 minute ago, et tu brute said: Wonder how they will get a vote on it. Not the Trust ad they’re only concerned about their ‘members’, not a public vote as you will get other clubs fans and mackems voting, so I would imagine it would be carried out using the club’s own membership. Trust don’t do democracy anyway seeing as they appoint board members without putting them to a vote. Bit of an ironic name, really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) Its good that they say they're going to consult - I guess, its just reasonable but after 14years of the opposite it feels good Much rather it just be the already long since besmerched shirts and shirt sleeves. XYZ St James Park for a very good shot at glory is at least worth consideration. 28 minutes ago, Sima said: Couldn’t give a single shit if they rename the ground to maximise commercial opportunities as long as they keep SJP in there. When Ashley did it you knew we weren’t getting a penny for it and he did it just to take the piss. Remember how gleeful some organisations and people were to jump on calling it that? Ironically they'd probably refer to it as SJP even if we got sponsored now out of the same spite, thus giving us less to lose. Edited October 22, 2021 by Wolfcastle Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Martin Samuel is bang on, which is why we need to bring in a big sponsorship now if we’re going to, the PL lawyers will be telling them what they have just done is illegal and will get them into trouble if they try and enforce it, what they bring in, in 4 weeks time will likely be harder to bypass Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 if ppl are gonna post links to daily mail articles then you've already clicked it so could you paste the article as well pls so the rest of us don't have to visit their site? thanks x Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 7 minutes ago, ManDoon said: I don’t wanna change the stadium name at all really tbh yeah just doesn’t seem right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 I’m sorry like. You can’t be happy with PIF changing the stadium name because they’ll throw a bit of money at it. Can we not remember the outpouring of dismay when the name was changed to the Sports Direct Arena? The hypocrisy stinks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 6 minutes ago, TheGuv said: I’m sorry like. You can’t be happy with PIF changing the stadium name because they’ll throw a bit of money at it. Can we not remember the outpouring of dismay when the name was changed to the Sports Direct Arena? The hypocrisy stinks. People also complained about Mike Ashleys treatment of workers but are happy about Saudi Arabia owning us. Let's be honest, the upset was about Mike Ashley more than about anything else. I don't think it's that hypocritical to not want Sports Direct Arena as the stadium name given it's a shitty brand, and shitty name, owned by a shitty owner that was paying nothing for it. Whereas this could be a means to an end, where due to fair play, if we want to start to challenge financially at the top we need to find ways of making more commercial income and this is one possible way. It's at least worth the discussion and I don't think makes a hypocrit of anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 8 minutes ago, TheGuv said: I’m sorry like. You can’t be happy with PIF changing the stadium name because they’ll throw a bit of money at it. Can we not remember the outpouring of dismay when the name was changed to the Sports Direct Arena? The hypocrisy stinks. The club got absolutely nothing out of the SD Arena stuff, which wouldn't be the case here, so I dunno if you can say its hypocritical... Not that I want us to change the name for any reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 I have to admit to being bemused people are ok with changing name now as if only problem with it before was money. It's st James park and it should stay as such Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 I'd be happy with it as long as it was a token name change to pump some money into the club. "St James' Park sponsored by X" would be fine by me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 5 minutes ago, NEEJ said: I'd be happy with it as long as it was a token name change to pump some money into the club. "St James' Park sponsored by X" would be fine by me. It won't matter regardless. They could rename it the Sabic Arena, or Aramaco at StJames, and it will still get called St James by everyone except Sky. Link to post 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