Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

St James' Park

Delima

by Delima
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

mrmojorisin75

mrmojorisin75

Posted
Posted

Really think he decided to buy us on a bit of a whim because he thought it'd be good fun owning a football club.

 

I'll bet he regretted it pretty quickly.

 

just don't believe that anymore, some variation of the club being cheap and available then looking to improve on his money makes more sense to me

 

the "good fun" bit stinks of bullshit to me, he's never ran the club that way since he bought it...alls he did was drink beer in the stands a few times and wear a Smith shirt

 

how was Japan by the way?

 

Mint.

 

It's like Korea only with some sort of thought put into it's design and the occasional clean-up. Sorry Oldtype. :lol:

 

:lol: only been once but it's canny is Japan aye

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mick

Mick

Posted
Posted

 

 

When I started going - mid sixties - and for quite a few years thereafter. I seem to remember we were one of the last "big" clubs to have perimiter advertising.

 

I stand by that comment you deem to be horseshit, the signage definitely seems to be a bigger issue on internet sites than it is in bars on Tyneside, I can barely remember perimiter advertising, shirt and everything else sponsors, or any of the other sell outs attracting much attention at all - pre internet days of course.

Like I said turfing long standing fans out of their seats to accomodate corporate and ultimately temporary fans was a far more emotive issue.

 

The advertising around the pitch came in the early 70's to our ground, the first advert I can ever remember was for McAlpine when they were building the East Stand.  People at work are talking about the sign that's gone up on the East Stand roof and not many have seen photographs of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sifu

Sifu

Posted
Posted

The platinum area is horrible it's a great view but it's a graveyard.

 

Honestly i'm embarrassed to cough let alone release last nights beer gas to the choking masses.

 

Oh I definitely agree with that. Atmosphere is f***ing dead there. At the Fulham game, I wanted to join in with the songs but I felt embarrassed to do so in fear of being given odd looks.

 

A bit unfair I think. A lot of the most passionate and long standing fans are in the PC and the atmosphere is not that bad - although I was once asked to sit down !

Of course you're correct in that the demographic of that part of the ground is very different to L7 or the Strawberry corner for example.

It has always been the same - years ago the Leazes was for radgies and produced ear splitting noise ; the Gallowgate was for young uns often accompanied by parents; the paddocks were for sort of better off people ; the popular was for long suffering moaning bastaads and the seats were for posh people - but nevertheless staunch fans - probably a bit like today's PC.

SJP always has and still can accomodate different types of fan and age group and I would passionately support any movement for a standing/singing area which would produce a real noise and atmosphere although I probably wouldn't want to be in it any more.

 

Well the occasions I have been there, I did feel a bit our of place. It is probably full of lifelong fans and I do respect them, it's just that like I've said, I feel slightly out of place there if I attempted to sing and all that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cp40

cp40

Posted
Posted

Probably been suggested but "SportsDirect.com, UK's Number 1" will end up being our goal celebration music.

 

Since when did we have goal celebration music?

 

as soon as you tell your master about this idea Stu.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disco

Disco

Posted
Posted

As many have said it probably wouldn't be so bad (even if Ashley wasn't in charge of SD) if it wasn't such a shit brand to be associated with.

 

Look at others, Emirates and Ethihad are both pretty respected airlines (long distance travel being an aspirational thing for many still), Man Utd have links with market leaders, like DHL on their kit, Stoke have a big local employer who I imagine do a lot of other stuff like this in the Potteries. Bolton have a sports companies as theirs, a fairly reputable one too who were founded in the Bolton area. All of these add something to the football brand in some way, to me Sports Direct don't do this. They're a great and successful business but by being associated with them any prestige the club has a brand goes out the window unfortunately.

 

The cloak and dagger way the club went about it too man, why not just say your putting SD signage up in the statement? Why leave it purposefully vague?

If some fans feel the can no longer trust what we say, that's a shame, but all we can do is continue to tell it as we see it and hope that people will take us at our word.

It all just has an unnecessary whiff of snideness about it which to me some at the club seem to revel in. It's the shit like this that pisses me off more than some of the transfer dealings as the getting your house in order strategy I can understand (although I still believe we're way too conservative regarding bidding for players)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heron

Heron

Posted
Posted

The board, whilst balancing the books are still total cunts in my eyes. We were discussing our hierarchy of my own workplace at work today, and one of the lads hit the nail on the head. It (the anger) isn't about the unpopular decisions that are made by those at the top, it's the fact they constantly lie and be snide about everything they do. Same goes for Ashley and co. If we need to make cuts and do certain things just do it, and tell us your doing it. Stop dicking around and treating us like shit.

 

Fucking hate these twats in charge, total and utter shitsacks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Colocho

Colocho

Posted
Posted

It (the anger) isn't about the unpopular decisions that are made by those at the top, it's the fact they constantly lie and be snide about everything they do. Same goes for Ashley and co. If we need to make cuts and do certain things just do it, and tell us your doing it. Stop dicking around and treating us like shit.

 

 

Well said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Colocho

Colocho

Posted
Posted

If there are any oldies on here I wonder what the outcry was when the famous black and whites stripes had the first logo plastered bang in the middle of the shirt?

 

As one who can remember no advertising hoardings,interviews with players/managers without multi sponored backdrops and that competition we're playing in tomorrow being called the League Cup I really can't see what the fuss is. Unsurprisingly nowadays it seems to be internet fans from Essex or somewhere who don't even attend SJP who have an issue rather than we long suffering Geordies who actually go to the match.

In fact the only thing I've ever got vexed about (besides the shit we've had to put up with on the field) was when they flogged me a bond to my seat for 500 quid and a couple of years later turfed us out into inferior seats to make way for fashion fans who have since deserted. Imagine if the FCB tried to pull that stunt.

No when Yohan rattles one in on Saturday I for one won't really give shit what is written on the roof, who has their name on our shirt or what the fack the league we play in is called this year.

 

I assume that Essex comment was aimed at me.

 

I'm sorry i'm not as apathetic as you.

 

Sports Direct is a nasty, tacky brand - which has been accused of employing children and has people working in factories that do not meet international standards. I don't like Sports Direct on moral grounds, and the basis for me disagreeing with the branding of SJP them isn't just an aesthetic thing (SJP looks fucking ridiculous, btw).

 

Then there's the small matter that there is no payment from Sports Direct to NUFC in last year's accounts. This too is absolutely unacceptable in my opinion. If you are cool with this, good for you. I disagree with Ashley using the football club I support, to promote his side interest (because in terms of NUFC, that's what Sports Direct should be).

 

The degree of the 'crimes' are substantially different and I'm not comparing shameless branding of a football club with accusations of child labour. The problem is that it is the same man who oversees both organisations and does so with complete self-interest and without a degree of care for the people affected.

 

Mike Ashley has ignored criticism over labour employment in much the same way he has ignored criticism of the way he runs our football club.

By the way, it's not just 'internet fans from Essex' that have a problem with our club being used as a marketing tool for Sports Direct, you're clearly out of touch with your own people/city if you truly believe this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Colocho

Colocho

Posted
Posted

I'm struggling to understand your reasoning that Sports Direct should be a "side interest", it brings in what, 10 times the revenue? Obviously it makes large profits too, which NUFC doesn't...

 

Why should Newcastle United and Sports Direct be associated? Because they are owned by the same person? Do all sports clubs owners associate the clubs they own with other organisations in their portfolio?

 

The only thing that links NUFC and SD is Mike Ashley. Sports Direct isn't a local company, it has no historical ties to the club - why should we have to accept providing them with free advertising that stains our stadium? I wasn't trying to suggest that SD should be a side interest to Ashley, but why should the fans of this club be forced to support his brand?

Link to post
Share on other sites
AliGupter

AliGupter

Posted
Posted

I'm struggling to understand your reasoning that Sports Direct should be a "side interest", it brings in what, 10 times the revenue? Obviously it makes large profits too, which NUFC doesn't...

 

Why should Newcastle United and Sports Direct be associated? Because they are owned by the same person? Do all sports clubs owners associate the clubs they own with other organisations in their portfolio?

 

The only thing that links NUFC and SD is Mike Ashley. Sports Direct isn't a local company, it has no historical ties to the club - why should we have to accept providing them with free advertising that stains our stadium? I wasn't trying to suggest that SD should be a side interest to Ashley, but why should the fans of this club be forced to support his brand?

 

"to promote his side interest" So that's exactly what you were trying to suggest. ???

Link to post
Share on other sites
Colocho

Colocho

Posted
Posted

I'm struggling to understand your reasoning that Sports Direct should be a "side interest", it brings in what, 10 times the revenue? Obviously it makes large profits too, which NUFC doesn't...

 

Why should Newcastle United and Sports Direct be associated? Because they are owned by the same person? Do all sports clubs owners associate the clubs they own with other organisations in their portfolio?

 

The only thing that links NUFC and SD is Mike Ashley. Sports Direct isn't a local company, it has no historical ties to the club - why should we have to accept providing them with free advertising that stains our stadium? I wasn't trying to suggest that SD should be a side interest to Ashley, but why should the fans of this club be forced to support his brand?

 

"to promote his side interest" So that's exactly what you were trying to suggest. ???

 

That is the only reason for the association... Which is wrong. He is using NUFC to promote his own company, that is what I disagree with.

 

The 2008 and 2009 accounts suggest NUFC paid SD £47,000 for the privilege of branding in SD! The concept that we are in fact 'supporting' SD is strengthened, when you consider the opportunity cost of not having a stadium sponsor that actually pays for advertising...

Link to post
Share on other sites
quayside

quayside

Posted
Posted

I'm struggling to understand your reasoning that Sports Direct should be a "side interest", it brings in what, 10 times the revenue? Obviously it makes large profits too, which NUFC doesn't...

 

Why should Newcastle United and Sports Direct be associated? Because they are owned by the same person? Do all sports clubs owners associate the clubs they own with other organisations in their portfolio?

 

The only thing that links NUFC and SD is Mike Ashley. Sports Direct isn't a local company, it has no historical ties to the club - why should we have to accept providing them with free advertising that stains our stadium? I wasn't trying to suggest that SD should be a side interest to Ashley, but why should the fans of this club be forced to support his brand?

 

"to promote his side interest" So that's exactly what you were trying to suggest. ???

 

That is the only reason for the association... Which is wrong. He is using NUFC to promote his own company, that is what I disagree with.

 

The 2008 and 2009 accounts suggest NUFC paid SD £47,000 for the privilege of branding in SD! The concept that we are in fact 'supporting' SD is strengthened, when you consider the opportunity cost of not having a stadium sponsor that actually pays for advertising...

 

It looks truly horrible and, personally, I see it as having degraded a great stadium.

 

But as far as the money side is concerned it's part of the deal with having Ashley own us. Just reading this forum it's obvious that plenty of people want him gone. As ever it's up to the individual as how much good they think he has done and is doing. But if we were funded by externally borrowed money we would be paying huge chunks of interest. In fact I shudder to think what rate we would be paying. If there is anyone around who would lend £140 million (or even half that) to a technically insolvent business they would want a substantial margin for doing so.

 

Ashley is a package deal - like it or not.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
quayside

quayside

Posted
Posted

That was only on the existing £74m, would we be getting the funds to cover the losses interest free?

 

At the risk of this thread going down the "we wouldn't have made those losses if Shepherd was still in charge" route I can't see that further funding would have been available once the 2007 accounts hit the mat. Despite earning high interest (between 6 and 11 per cent) on its loans Barclays clearly did not like the look of it and ran for the hills at the first opportunity.

 

Just as a further thought - if we were fully funded externally the buyer would have had to borrow the funds to pay for the club in the first place, so you could add another £140 million to the debt that would have to be serviced. This is the model that Liverpool were on and ManU still are. Obviously in that situation the club has to make good profits just to pay the interest payments. It would totally kill us imo.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...