Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:38, Shearergol said:

 

Because the idea of paying for sponsorship is to get money into the club to spend. If they didn't charge they'd not be getting the money in :lol:

Expand  

 

Well I understand that much :lol: I just wonder if there's a real disadvantage to a less lucrative sponsor (but still presumably loads better than our current incumbents) but just let them advertise their primary but maybe banned one for nowt

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:39, HTT II said:

Nor do they or anyone else, it’s just football’s way of pretending they care about clubs not going above and beyond their means financially to the detriment of others, unless it’s to the detriment of others they don’t like/want/care about. It’s all complete and utter bull shit and was proved by Man City being allowed back into the CL, the minute any half decent lawyer challenges this bogus shit, nowt would stand up or stick. It’s nothing but an empty threat mainly to keep the smaller little insignificant clubs in check, but guess what, we are the big boys in Toon now and they fucking hate it. 

Expand  

As @Jackie Broon said earlier, they should be careful what they wish for as there are lawyers who think that FFP could go if a legal challenge was mounted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the idea was seemingly to have 'Vision 2030' as the prominent club/shirt sponsor, and presumably be highly paid for it, but can we not just have that as a sleeve sponsor or something, and just be paid the 'market rate' for that, and then be paid our 'main' sponsors fee from the airline or whatever for the front of shirt / stadium name?

 

 

Edited by TK-421

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:45, TK-421 said:

I know the idea was seemingly to have 'Vision 2030' as the prominent shoirt sponsor, and presumabley by highly paid for it, but can we not just have that as a sleeve sponsor or something, and just be poaid the 'market rate' for that, and then be paid our 'main' sponsors fee from the airline or whatever for the front of shirt / stadium name?

Expand  

Aye, that's what I meant :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:44, Scoot said:

 

Love this. A nice big sponsorship deal, not linked to our owners, worth multi millions of pounds.

 

That'll get the other 19 clubs thinking of a new rule they'll have to vote in favour of.

Expand  

They'll ban airline sponsors next

 

 

Edited by Peppe

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:41, OpenC said:

 

Well I understand that much :lol: I just wonder if there's a real disadvantage to a less lucrative sponsor (but still presumably loads better than our current incumbents) but just let them advertise their primary but maybe banned one for nowt

Expand  

 

We should announce UNICEF as our new sponsor, with all earnings going to charity. Then launch "Newcastle TV" which gets a shocking number of subscriptions all across the Emirates for a huge amount of income.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I worry that this is all an attempt to draw the KSA into interfering with this so the EPL can argue the legal assurances are inadequate and so they will expel us from the EPL or deduct points that ensure we get relegated and are then refused promotion back into the EPL whilst the PIF hold majority ownership!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how they decide what is a fair amount for spo sponsorship ?

 

I remember reading about Man Utd having a deal which I think was more than our main sponsors at the time purely to be associated with a Thai tyre brand or some such. Ie the tyre makers gave Man utd million s just to use their crest etc officially in Thailand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:46, Peppe said:

They'll ban airline sponsors next

 

 

 

Expand  

Without a doubt, think about all them the poor gambling sponsors who could miss out if they allowed that. Mind Man City and Arsenal will still be allowed to fly high!

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:48, Shearergol said:

 

We should announce UNICEF as our new sponsor, with all earnings going to charity. Then launch "Newcastle TV" which gets a shocking number of subscriptions all across the Emirates for a huge amount of income.

Expand  

 

Aye, wonder how much Amnesty Int'l will pay to sponsor us??

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:48, Ankles Bennett said:

I worry that this is all an attempt to draw the KSA into interfering with this so the EPL can argue the legal assurances are inadequate and so they will expel us from the EPL or deduct points that ensure we get relegated and are then refused promotion back into the EPL whilst the PIF hold majority ownership!!

Expand  

 

You'd have to think the ownership will know not to fuck with that given the cost.

 

But can just see us winning our first trophy in generations then being stripped of it.

 

 

Edited by Inferior Acuña

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 12:30, deejeck said:

Just reading there that USM have already paid Everton a £30m deposit for the naming rights of the new stadium, which would fly in the face of what they're all trying to do here.  Nothing more than a disruption technique by the looks of it.

Expand  

PL just rotten to the core - clubs seem to be hell bent on keeping Newcastle down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:48, Ankles Bennett said:

I worry that this is all an attempt to draw the KSA into interfering with this so the EPL can argue the legal assurances are inadequate and so they will expel us from the EPL or deduct points that ensure we get relegated and are then refused promotion back into the EPL whilst the PIF hold majority ownership!!

Expand  

 

:scared:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 18:45, TK-421 said:

I know the idea was seemingly to have 'Vision 2030' as the prominent club/shirt sponsor, and presumably be highly paid for it, but can we not just have that as a sleeve sponsor or something, and just be paid the 'market rate' for that, and then be paid our 'main' sponsors fee from the airline or whatever for the front of shirt / stadium name?

 

 

 

Expand  

If Vision 2030 has links to PIF then we can't have that based on what the 18 clubs have voted for.

 

The issue isn't even about market rate they have voted to ban any sponsorship with links, which is ludicrous and hopefully a half decent lawyer rips it apart 

 

 

Edited by Geordie Ahmed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Retrospectively will this not result in a number of questions about current Premier League clubs and their sponsorships related to their owners? I imagine the Crystal Palace sleeve sponsorship by FaceBank would be questioned based on the investor John Textor being involved in the club as would Everton, Leicester City and Man City.

 

The game is long gone and now the pressure on Hoffman is being reported based on other clubs you'll probably see some awful decisions. Clubs voting that intended on creating a Super League 6 months ago to the detriment of those that have voted with them now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 20:49, TK-421 said:

 

Sure I read SABIC is a subsidiary of Aramco, so the PL 18 would probably try and veto that too.

Expand  

Isn’t the ban on owners sponsoring clubs through their other companies so for example PIF can’t use Disney to sponsor us. Aramco is separate from PIF as is SABIC. Not sure why Vision 2030 can’t sponsor us as well as it’s a government initiative and not part of PIF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 21:29, GeordieDazzler said:

Obviously it's targeted at us but how does this affect say Leicester, kit and stadium are for the owners company. Seems you we would win any legal battle quite quickly if they are allowed to continue?

Expand  

The proposed new rules would only take effect on any new sponsorship deals, and those already in place like Leicester, Man City etc would be allowed to continue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  On 19/10/2021 at 21:34, SAK said:

Isn’t the ban on owners sponsoring clubs through their other companies so for example PIF can’t use Disney to sponsor us. Aramco is separate from PIF as is SABIC. Not sure why Vision 2030 can’t sponsor us as well as it’s a government initiative and not part of PIF.

Expand  

PIF don’t own Disney, just have minority shareholdings in it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...