Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I hope that the media still refer to St James' as that and not SDA, if the media refuse to use the name then nobody is going to pay him anything, not that I'm sure he wants to sell the name in the first place. Hopefully his tacky brand will get no more publicity then it currently does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeloEmre Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I hope that the media still refer to St James' as that and not SDA, if the media refuse to use the name then nobody is going to pay him anything, not that I'm sure he wants to sell the name in the first place. Hopefully his tacky brand will get no more publicity then it currently does. He will probably just ban them from matches if they don't use the new name. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I would imagine they'll need planning permission to put up a new sign where the current St James Park one is, whether the council have any real power to veto it, I don't know but I doubt it. Think about how long it took last time - I'm sure the original application surfaced like late last year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I hope that the media still refer to St James' as that and not SDA, if the media refuse to use the name then nobody is going to pay him anything, not that I'm sure he wants to sell the name in the first place. Hopefully his tacky brand will get no more publicity then it currently does. im guessing lambias has told organisations call us sda in your articles- or you dont get in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I would imagine they'll need planning permission to put up a new sign where the current St James Park one is, whether the council have any real power to veto it, I don't know but I doubt it. If they need planning permission then the council does have real power, at least in the first instance and then it would probably go higher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 http://publicaccess.newcastle.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=L5ZY13BSAP000 These are the public comments regarding the signs for Shite Direct on the Gallowgate and Barrack Road, 275, not that they made any difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Dave is one of the biggest trolls on here, look at his post count ffs and this is a guy that supported Leeds through his early teens. I met some Barnsley fans years ago while on holiday and went to see Newcastle play Barnsley at Barnsley. They came in our end have supported Newcastle ever since and now go to more games than I do and they have kids who follow Newcastle. Cool story You can't do anything, it's 'cool story BRO'. Succinct write-up by .com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I would imagine they'll need planning permission to put up a new sign where the current St James Park one is, whether the council have any real power to veto it, I don't know but I doubt it. If they need planning permission then the council does have real power, at least in the first instance and then it would probably go higher. Well exactly but I can't see the Secretary of State knocking it back on appeal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 He will probably just ban them from matches if they don't use the new name. They'll be able to watch a stream and report that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Thinking about it, I don't know what's worse. The cheap, tacky signs on the Gallowgate/East stand or the cheap, tacky way that he'll find to cover it up during the Olympics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Doubt they will need planning permission to replace an existing sign if it's of similar size to the previous one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Taken the reference to his shitty company out of the thread title, I don't want to see it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Doubt they will need planning permission to replace an existing sign if it's of similar size to the previous one. Got different writing on it though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Taken the reference to his shitty company out of the thread title, I don't want to see it. Well done, the more that people mention it the more publicity he gets as google will pick it up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Taken the reference to his shitty company out of the thread title, I don't want to see it. this whole thing is a publicity stunt. we should stop using the name of his brand and deny him his free publicity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 FFS i thought they had backtracked then.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Taken the reference to his shitty company out of the thread title, I don't want to see it. this whole thing is a publicity stunt. we should stop using the name of his brand and deny him his free publicity. Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 if the freehold of the stadium land is in some way held by the freeman of the City- can they exercise any power over the land/use. Can they step in? anybody know the exact situation regarding the lease on the stadium? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 http://publicaccess.newcastle.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=L5ZY13BSAP000 These are the public comments regarding the signs for s**** Direct on the Gallowgate and Barrack Road, 275, not that they made any difference. That is only the adverts on the outside, I'm not sure they need anything for the St James' Park signs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Doubt they will need planning permission to replace an existing sign if it's of similar size to the previous one. They might need planning permission as the new name is clearly an advert. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghandis Flip-Flop Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 http://publicaccess.newcastle.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=L5ZY13BSAP000 These are the public comments regarding the signs for s**** Direct on the Gallowgate and Barrack Road, 275, not that they made any difference. That is only the adverts on the outside, I'm not sure they need anything for the St James' Park signs. Well the Ricoh is having to be referred to as the City of Coventry Stadium during the Olympics, so maybe a temporary sign will have to be made Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 This should be interesting, i'll get the popcorn in........ It's the opposite of interesting, proper hardcore yawn. Well yes and i'am due a afternoon kip, this may help me along. Try this, better than nytol... http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=10709 Nah its more fun/boring to watch people who support the same team, trying to dissect each others degree of support because they go to more games, live closer, used to support another team when they were 4, may or may not agree with the Fat man, are or aren't a Geordie and being dismissed for being a Southerner. Funny as we all love the same thing. I was only joking with you Bimpy man. backtracking!!! he's backtracking!!!! Probably best that you did delete your original post and quote mine as nobody would know what you were on about. posting logistics burrrrrrrn :'( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Dave is one of the biggest trolls on here, look at his post count ffs and this is a guy that supported Leeds through his early teens. For what it's worth, this is a lie. No more bites. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 aye fair enough, ignore list time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Dave is one of the biggest trolls on here, look at his post count ffs and this is a guy that supported Leeds through his early teens. For what it's worth, this is a lie. No more bites. You lie, making 92,000 posts on a forum won't change that. The fact you've felt the need to change something on my profile shows how much the truth hurts. 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