St James' Park

[Ameritoon]

It's the way that Llambias talks about it that annoys me. "Well the fans want more players" "We have to buy a striker in January"

 

Boo fucking hoo. It's your job! Yous own a FOOTBALL club, it's not a favour to us - it's what you have to do.

 

As this is all because of us

 

His quotes are what's really pissed me off. Absolute donkey shit way to handle this whole situation, clearly NUFC is using Herman Cain's PR people.

[Guest bimpy474]

I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

I worry about how naive you'd have to be to think this will increase our income by a single penny.

 

And this is the divide, those supporting the move/not too bothered/accept it as the future believe the money will go into the team.

 

The rest believe and quite rightly so given all the evidence from the last few transfers windows, lies and pathetic statements that no money will be put into the team.

 

There isn't any money. If at some point in the future under this regime a third party company decides to pour money into the club for the sponsorship of the stadium then we can discuss the worth of the concept, and if that money will go into the team. Until that point it's just mugging the fans off with yet more crass advertising for the owner's other major interest daubed all over the stadium and now the media. For Ashley's benefit and nobody else's.

 

If anyone genuinely believes that we need to do this to show a company capable of this level of sponsorship deal then I fear for their sanity. Even if the argument about SD taking the flak now is true, what kind of company would look at all this anger and resentment and think it's a good thing to jump into with millions of pounds? As Ian was saying earlier, would it being renamed the Aldi Arena or anything else be any less of an insult to the history of the stadium? Aside from the money (hopefully), would it fuck.

 

I know theres no money Dave, i was just saying that people who are ok with this think thats what will happen, which has been proven time and time again that it doesn't under this man.

[JH]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested.

 

This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity.

 

And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that?

 

If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point?

[Cronky]

I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

I worry about how naive you'd have to be to think this will increase our income by a single penny.

 

But it's what they say will happen. Why doubt them?

 

Nobody knows whether this is going to succeed. Renaming a stadium is a new venture, as far as I know, never been tried by a major English club. I think Llambias himself said that it was a matter of giving things a go, in this particular window of opportunity where the naming rights and the shirt sponsorship would both be up for sale.

 

Of course it's a risk. The question is, do you want it to succeed?

 

they've not decided to rename the stadium after new sponsors though. they've decided to rename it the "sports direct arena" with no financial benefit for the club. that's the facts of the case and how the name will remain indefinitely. the rest is speculation.

 

Just to clarify - are you saying that Ashley has no intention of selling the naming rights to another company?

 

If you're not, I don't see how you can dismiss the idea that someone's going to come in.

[JH]

We've waited two years and noone has come in and bought the stadium rights. Nobody wants them. Nobody wants to be associated with Ashley and the bad press that will come with it.

[Cronky]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested.

 

This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity.

 

And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that?

 

If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point?

 

My question was - do you want a sponsor to come in and pay £8-10 million per year for the naming rights on the stadium, or don't you? Quite simple.

[timnufc22]

Its about drawing the line. St. James' Park is what it is - nothing else. SD Arena, Adidas Arena, Aldi Arena, Tesco etc etc I dont want anything else even for money. Because if you keep accepting this crap at some point people will stop and wonder when the hell happened when we have SD on the seats, blue and red trims on the kit, "this substitution is sponsered by... ", Sponser music when we score, sponser on the pitch... not everything should have a price. You can still try for success (look at us the moment, only a start I know), its still possible, and I'd rather support a club with a bit of honour, principle, and identity which is still chasing success.

[JH]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested.

 

This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity.

 

And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that?

 

If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point?

 

My question was - do you want a sponsor to come in and pay £8-10 million per year for the naming rights on the stadium, or don't you? Quite simple.

 

No.

[Guest ToonUltra]

No.

[Chris_R]

 

You've obviously got quite an agenda against Ashley which extends far beyond the re-naming of the stadium. Fair enough, you're not alone in that, but the difficulty I have in reading this thread is knowing how much it's yet another series of We-Hate-Ashley rants, and how much it's a weighing up of the pros and cons of selling the stadium rights in what's a very competitive and commercial field.

 

Actually I don't have much of an agenda against him, not that you'd believe it reading what I've posted tonight.

 

But it's really the first anti-Ashley stuff I've ever written and in general I've defended him and the fact that his money effectively saved us post Fat Fred - which I still stand by. And up to the Keegan debacle I think his intentions were genuine, and even after that I continued to defend him or at least refrained from criticism as on balance I thought he was the best option we had and that he might come good.

 

However there's only so many times you can kick a dog before it stops being pleased to see you and then eventually turns and bites. I've had enough. I agree that protests won't work, which I've already said. He's too thick skinned and money orientated for that to have even the remotest effect. It'd be about as effective as trying to knock your house down by throwing snowballs at it. You'll do no damage, and everyone watching will just think you're a fucking imbecile.

 

The only thing to do is to quietly and determinedly take his money away from him, and do the same to any company that takes over the naming rights. Make it public that this is what's being done, and bloody make sure we do it. It's not exactly hard to not shop in Sports Direct ffs, it's not as if there's nowhere else to go. Ask other fans to do the same, I'm sure there'll be plenty who share our concerns if this becomes widespread and would fear it happening to their club too.

 

It's workable, it doesn't disrupt the team and it's the only thing that can work.

 

Just let's not use the word "Boycott", in any of it's varied spellings!

[wormy]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested.

 

This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity.

 

And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that?

 

If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point?

 

I honestly can't see it happening, Cronky. If it does, then okay. I'm not one for the heritage argument. If we can get some cash in the coffers then whatever. But why do we believe it's going to happen? Havn't they been attempting this for the past 2 years? Why do people suddenly think, because they've taking '@St James' Park' from the stadium name, prospective sponsors will now be more interested after having 2 years to consider it?

[Cronky]

We've waited two years and noone has come in and bought the stadium rights. Nobody wants them. Nobody wants to be associated with Ashley and the bad press that will come with it.

 

Nobody wanted to lend their name to the blah-de-blah@stjames'spark stadium. It was a naff idea that came about because they didn't have the nerve to offer the proper naming rights. That's what they're offering now.

[Decky]

O2 Arena is probably the best we could hope for. Better than that Sports Direct shit, although we know O2 arnt interested, no one is.

[timnufc22]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested.

 

This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity.

 

And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that?

 

If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point?

 

My question was - do you want a sponsor to come in and pay £8-10 million per year for the naming rights on the stadium, or don't you? Quite simple.

 

I dont, no.

[johnnypd]

I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

I worry about how naive you'd have to be to think this will increase our income by a single penny.

 

But it's what they say will happen. Why doubt them?

 

Nobody knows whether this is going to succeed. Renaming a stadium is a new venture, as far as I know, never been tried by a major English club. I think Llambias himself said that it was a matter of giving things a go, in this particular window of opportunity where the naming rights and the shirt sponsorship would both be up for sale.

 

Of course it's a risk. The question is, do you want it to succeed?

 

they've not decided to rename the stadium after new sponsors though. they've decided to rename it the "sports direct arena" with no financial benefit for the club. that's the facts of the case and how the name will remain indefinitely. the rest is speculation.

 

Just to clarify - are you saying that Ashley has no intention of selling the naming rights to another company?

 

If you're not, I don't see how you can dismiss the idea that someone's going to come in.

 

where did i "dismiss" it? maybe you are confused and used the wrong word. I have simply stuck to the facts of the current situation, something you seem loath to do.

[Dave]

I'd MUCH rather have the identity of the stadium and miss out on signing another player a year*. It's not even a fucking question.

 

*Llambias' words, not mine.

[Boosden]

I’ve become numb to these kick in the balls in the past few years, so it was no surprise last night when I heard this.

 

1: Who wants to pay us for this (Brand becomes hated, unless its Greggs)

 

2: Even if we were paid £100 million there is no track record from the board for investing this money into the squad.

 

3: Emirates was a brand new stadium, Eastlands, the airline paid £200 million I think (A dodge for Uefa financial financial fair play rules)

 

I hate that it has been named this.

I will get a chill down my spine whenever St James park is referred to as such, but to me and anyone who knows what they’re talking about it will always be St James park.

They can decide to call it whatever the fuck they like but it will be called St James park long after they have gone (Dead horribly, hopefully) 

[thomas]

I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

I worry about how naive you'd have to be to think this will increase our income by a single penny.

 

And this is the divide, those supporting the move/not too bothered/accept it as the future believe the money will go into the team.

I don't believe it for a second but I also won't get frothing mad about it.

 

It sucks and if there was a realistic way to get Ashley to NOT DO THIS I would be all about supporting that effort. And,questions of whether NUFC will see any money aside, I DO sadly think this is the way it's headed and none will be spared, except maybe Barça and any other fan owned club. Does anyone really think the Glazers wouldn't rename OT to the Peniswrinkle Pagoda if someone waved enough cash, fans be damned?

[Chris_R]

I'd MUCH rather have the identity of the stadium and miss out on signing another player a year*. It's not even a f***ing question.

 

*Llambias' words, not mine.

 

So would I. Every time. It's a fucking slippery slope that will lead to us playing in blue and red stripes and most of the other shit that timnufc22 suggested at the top of the page.

 

However ignoring that, the real choice isn't the one you proposed above. It's either have the identity of the stadium remain the same or allow Ashley to just trouser £10m a year and then roll round in it in his house whilst masturbating furiously.

 

AND have a slippery slope towards playing in blue and red stripes and the other shit that timnufc22 suggested.

[Cronky]

I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria.

 

The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make.

 

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club?

 

You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field.

 

I worry about how naive you'd have to be to think this will increase our income by a single penny.

 

But it's what they say will happen. Why doubt them?

 

Nobody knows whether this is going to succeed. Renaming a stadium is a new venture, as far as I know, never been tried by a major English club. I think Llambias himself said that it was a matter of giving things a go, in this particular window of opportunity where the naming rights and the shirt sponsorship would both be up for sale.

 

Of course it's a risk. The question is, do you want it to succeed?

 

they've not decided to rename the stadium after new sponsors though. they've decided to rename it the "sports direct arena" with no financial benefit for the club. that's the facts of the case and how the name will remain indefinitely. the rest is speculation.

 

Just to clarify - are you saying that Ashley has no intention of selling the naming rights to another company?

 

If you're not, I don't see how you can dismiss the idea that someone's going to come in.

 

where did i "dismiss" it? maybe you are confused and used the wrong word. I have simply stuck to the facts of the current situation, something you seem loath to do.

 

Your first post didn't acknowledge that the club's stated plan was to use the 'Sports Direct Arena' name as a prelude to getting in sponsorship from somewhere else.

 

I wanted to clarify whether that was because you felt that the club actually had no intention of getting another sponsor, or whether you felt they were bound to fail.

[KaKa]

Just wanted to check ... does all the current sports direct branding at the stadium get replaced with a new sponsor, should one acquire the naming rights?

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

:lol: :lol: :lol:  at people talking about getting success on the pitch.

 

This is Newcastle United man!

[Guest bimpy474]

Just wanted to check ... does all the current sports direct branding at the stadium get replaced with a new sponsor, should one acquire the naming rights?

 

I would think that is something they would sort out if they find one, and no would be my answer, fatty will still own the club.

[Dave]

:lol: :lol: :lol:  at people talking about getting success on the pitch.

 

This is Newcastle United man!

 

Howay mate, all we need is another £8m a year and we're laughing. Final step in our Aston Villa Arsenal Everton Tottenham NEWCASTLE plan for world domination.

[Chris_R]

Exactly.

 

Ashley's STATED LEVEL OF AMBITION is to finish top 10 every year. He's got no intention of pushing us on beyond that. He wants us to avoid relegation, comfortably, but only to protect his investment. After that he couldn't GAF what happens as long as the money keeps rolling in.