St James' Park

[BigValley]

Can we do a 2 year deal for some good money. Then when we got more to use fast and with comersial money and other income. Lets say we are around 18 to 10 this years. Then the next years we have nothing on the stadium. But in 6 years time we get a very big sponsor for some years when we are pushing for top 4 and champions League. 

I think this is one way to do things. 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by BigValley

[Toon No9]

Do we really need to sell the name of the stadium?

Lets just have any company as headsponsor of the stadium.

 

St James Park, sponsored by Aramco (or whoever the sponsor would be).

[Unbelievable]

6 hours 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. Even if Ashley paid £20m a year for the naming rights people still would have been aghast. 

i understand the point you’re making Guv, but to me there are major differences between what happened ten years ago and what’s potentially happening here:

 

- in 2011 we had already suffered years of Keegan being messed around with and unfairly dismissed, relegation and protest. The renaming back then was motivated by spite from a petty owner

 

- there was no renumeration. As Llambias said at the time: "Naming the stadium the Sports Direct Arena helps up to showcase the opportunity to interested parties. We are now actively seeking a long-term sponsor wishing to acquire full naming rights for the stadium.” Right..

 

- we have FFP to contend with now. If the new owners want to make the club the best it can be, they need to grow revenue streams.

 

- they’ve communicated this much better than Ashley ever could, putting feelers out and suggesting the fans will get a say in whether it happens or not.

 

Having said that, I’d rather they keep the name as is and sell the naming rights to a new built if it ever comes to that, provided it will not hamper the execution of their plans. If however it is imperative to their plans and the majority of fans get behind it I think that’s still a respectful way to handle the situation. We all want change. If this is the price to pay than so be it.

[Wandy]

I'd have no problem with it being something like "The Aramco Stadium at St James Park". As long as that full name gets said by commentators etc at games etc then there's no issue for me. I guess the two most important issues with a renaming are the St James being in the title, and the whole name needs to sound prestigious. That's one of the main reasons why people were aghast at the SD Arena.

[Unbelievable]

2 hours ago, Wullie said:

It's grim isn't it? I really hope we can win something quite quickly because I really don't like the way we're exposing ourselves as a fanbase who will really welcome absolutely anything in pursuit of a decent full back. Maybe getting a trophy in the cabinet will allow some people to reset their thinking a little bit (or maybe that's very naive).

 

At least there is a sense at Man United and Liverpool amongst their fans that "We'll always be relatively successful so we don't necessarily have to love every shitty thing our owners are doing"

 

What I've seen recently makes me think we'd have been the one group of fans absolutely buzzing about being invited into a Super League.

 

I personally don't see the connection. My main gripe with Ashley was always that he did not allow Newcastle United to compete at the level it was capable of. He willfully took commercial space without paying a dime for it, instructed managers to ignore cup competitions because there was no money in it and always just did the bare minimum to keep us clinging on to the gravy train. Meaningful investment only ever came when that place came under threat. As such, and with the FFP rules being as they currently are to prevent the exact scenario where a PIF come in and plough a few billion in to blow the competition away, I understand that new owners need to look at increasing all revenue streams, including commercial revenue. Heck, it's what Mike Ashley should have been doing all these years. "We don't demand a tam that wins, we demand a club that tries" for me is all about the owners of the club doing what's best for the club first and foremost. I don't think introducing new sponsorship deals contradicts this, quite the contrary in fact.

[Wullie]

1 minute ago, Unbelievable said:

 

I personally don't see the connection. My main gripe with Ashley was always that he did not allow Newcastle United to compete at the level it was capable of. He willfully took commercial space without paying a dime for it, instructed managers to ignore cup competitions because there was no money in it and always just did the bare minimum to keep us clinging on to the gravy train. Meaningful investment only ever came when that place came under threat. As such, and with the FFP rules being as they currently are to prevent the exact scenario where a PIF come in and plough a few billion in to blow the competition away, I understand that new owners need to look at increasing all revenue streams, including commercial revenue. Heck, it's what Mike Ashley should have been doing all these years. "We don't demand a tam that wins, we demand a club that tries" for me is all about the owners of the club doing what's best for the club first and foremost. I don't think introducing new sponsorship deals contradicts this, quite the contrary in fact.

 

Man United and Liverpool would never rename their ground. It's too precious to the supporters. Those clubs monetize fucking EVERYTHING but they won't touch the grounds. They'd have a riot on their hands (as they did with the Super League proposals).

 

For us it seems like "yeah it's precious, but not as precious as £20m a year that could buy half a good midfielder"

 

This attitude I'm seeing of money being the only thing that matters in any decisions the club makes is a bit grubby and it makes me uneasy.

 

I've come to think some people would change the colours to Saudi Green if they thought it would get the club into the Champions League.

[Unbelievable]

2 hours ago, Kanji said:

Commercial revenue isn’t dollar for dollar transfer fee income. Every major deal has lasting impact over multiple years via the way FFP calcs are spread and accounted for. 
 

I am open to all and any ways to get commercial revenues that don’t involve the stadium name. But if the overall goal is to make us successful as possible as soon as possible, ill trust the club owners to communicate and do the right thing until they don’t. 
 

“they are powerful enough to figure it out via other ways” is a fine comment but hard for me to accept that because it’s purely hypothetical  

 

 

Exactly. Also, those means would be skirting around the edges of fair play by definition. You could argue that so is selling the stadium naming rights or shirt sponsorship to "related companies", but I'd personally argue that our commercial revenue should be on a par with the likes of Spurs, City and the likes. It was 15 years ago before a man child decided to buy us and plaster his own company all over us without providing anything in return. Our commercial revenue should be a multitude higher than it currently is. See for example here where it says: "Newcastle’s commercial revenue for the 2019-20 season was £29million, only £1m more than 2007, which was Mike Ashley’s first year as owner. By way of comparison, Tottenham’s annual commercial revenue over the same period increased from £39m to £162m." Over the 14 years we've "lost" half a billion pounds worth of commercial revenue. At the moment our competitors earn over 100m a year more than us. We need to catch up, simple as. The damage Mike Ashley has done is almost unrepairable and football's authorities have put measures in place to prevent "financial doping", so I don't think the new owners can afford to not tap into the unused potential here.

[Unbelievable]

3 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

Man United and Liverpool would never rename their ground. It's too precious to the supporters. Those clubs monetize fucking EVERYTHING but they won't touch the grounds. They'd have a riot on their hands (as they did with the Super League proposals).

 

For us it seems like "yeah it's precious, but not as precious as £20m a year that could buy half a good midfielder"

 

This attitude I'm seeing of money being the only thing that matters in any decisions the club makes is a bit grubby and it makes me uneasy.

 

I've come to think some people would change the colours to Saudi Green if they thought it would get the club into the Champions League.

 

I don't see it man. The Glazers are horrible owners in much the same way as Ashley was, with the difference that they understand that they need to grow the club in order to compete. If they continue to drop behind other clubs (like us) they won't think twice about renaming Old Trafford to save their sorry asses.

 

I've heard stories that Barcelona would never sell their shirt sponsorship, until they did.

 

I'd much prefer Newcastle United grow organically even if that means increasing commercial revenue through selling the stadium naming rights, than have the Saudi's drop a few billion on Mbappe and Haaland and compete through financial doping by getting around financial fair play by abusing loopholes, but that's maybe just me.

[Kid Icarus]

You're using Spurs as an example but they haven't renamed their stadium. 

[Happinesstan]

1 hour ago, Toon No9 said:

Do we really need to sell the name of the stadium?

Lets just have any company as headsponsor of the stadium.

 

St James Park, sponsored by Aramco (or whoever the sponsor would be).

I doubt there would be any reason for broadcasters to mention the sponsor if that was the case.

[Unbelievable]

Just now, kisearch said:

You're using Spurs as an example but they haven't renamed their stadium. 

 

They built a new one and they haven't named it after a sponsor in return for money... yet.

 

The fact of the matter is that we need to grow commercial revenue and the freedom for owners to simply pump money into the club is fairly limited. I appreciate the fact that the new owners are seemingly willing to engage in a conversation about how to do this and let the fans have a say.

[Wullie]

3 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

I've heard stories that Barcelona would never sell their shirt sponsorship, until they did.

And that's a really shit decision they took. They got a load of money that they wasted every penny of, and for what? Everyone used to think "Mes que un club" was actually genuine, absolutely nobody thinks that now, it's a joke.

 

Depends if that sort of thing, your club's identity as something more than just a business that funnels money to footballers, is important to you, for me it is.

[Hanshithispantz]

Wullie's completely right. but I've fallen so far out of love with the game that it just doesn't register in the way it used too. I imagine others are the same.

 

It's a domino effect though and fans absolutely need to fight for as much of a clubs history as possible.

[Unbelievable]

1 minute ago, Wullie said:

And that's a really shit decision they took. They got a load of money that they wasted every penny of, and for what? Everyone used to think "Mes que un club" was actually genuine, absolutely nobody thinks that now, it's a joke.

 

Depends if that sort of thing, your club's identity as something more than just a business that funnels money to footballers, is important to you, for me it is.

 

That's fine and if it is put to a vote you will get your say. If however the majority of fans agree with selling the stadium naming rights in return for increased commercial income and an ability to compete at a higher level, would you still oppose or would it stop you from supporting the club?

[Kid Icarus]

11 minutes ago, Wullie said:

And that's a really shit decision they took. They got a load of money that they wasted every penny of, and for what? Everyone used to think "Mes que un club" was actually genuine, absolutely nobody thinks that now, it's a joke.

 

Depends if that sort of thing, your club's identity as something more than just a business that funnels money to footballers, is important to you, for me it is.

 

Kind of how I feel about the 'what is a club in any case' SBR quote in relation to us. I still remember how much everyone on here lauded those words when his book came out and then especially when he died. How true what he was saying was and how it summed up what it means to support your club.  Fast forward to now and believing in that feels as ridiculous as believing in Santa in your 30s. The fact he specifically talks about it not being the contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes is just an extra kick in the nuts. Ashley completely ruined this fanbase's sense of proprietary like.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by kisearch

[Guest HTT II]

SJP is the club’s heritage as is the name NUFC, they would be daft to scrub that out for a few extra quid, the stadium, the name, it is the club since it’s formation and renaming that would devalue the club’s heritage and legacy which they will actually need in order to sell the club as a brand globally and of course for some sportwashing…

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by HTT II

[Wullie]

12 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

 

That's fine and if it is put to a vote you will get your say. If however the majority of fans agree with selling the stadium naming rights in return for increased commercial income and an ability to compete at a higher level, would you still oppose or would it stop you from supporting the club?

 

I would absolutely still oppose it, and I would feel even worse about my fellow supporters than I do at the moment, which isn't great tbh. Their dogged financial support for Ashley is one of the things that made me so disconnected in the first place.

 

Stop supporting the club? No, probably not based on that alone but I'd have to start again properly before I make that decision.  

[Guest neesy111]

3 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

I would absolutely still oppose it, and I would feel even worse about my fellow supporters than I do at the moment, which isn't great tbh. Their dogged financial support for Ashley is one of the things that made me so disconnected in the first place.

 

Stop supporting the club? No, probably not based on that alone but I'd have to start again properly before I make that decision.  

 

Yeap, so essentially if Ashley had opened the money taps then anything goes.

 

We lose our identity (of what's left) if we go down this route imo.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by neesy111

[Colos Short and Curlies]

37 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

Man United and Liverpool would never rename their ground. It's too precious to the supporters. Those clubs monetize fucking EVERYTHING but they won't touch the grounds. They'd have a riot on their hands (as they did with the Super League proposals).

 

For us it seems like "yeah it's precious, but not as precious as £20m a year that could buy half a good midfielder"

 

This attitude I'm seeing of money being the only thing that matters in any decisions the club makes is a bit grubby and it makes me uneasy.

 

I've come to think some people would change the colours to Saudi Green if they thought it would get the club into the Champions League.

 

I don't think its just a case of it being precious, its also the case with OT and Anfield that the names are so well known globally that sponsors also know that it would be pointless renaming them as no one would take any notice. You just get a shit load of branding all over the place.

 

Would people be OK with SJP becoming a real corporate stadium with every last inch plastered with sponsors if the name was kept? 

[Kanj]

Not a single person would advocate for saudi green stripes, Wullie. You're far more intelligent to actually believe that, mate.

 

It's also quite easy for Liverpool or Man United to not sell their stadium naming rights because of the decades of pretty sound footballing decisions/success on the pitch that has made them an absolute global brand with massively lucrative deals already to begin with. So while selling their stadium would absolutely cause a riot, but given their owners ran to join a super league before turning around and not doing it, don't think for a second they'd do it when the going gets tough for them when little old Newcastle becomes a competitor, or when Jurgen Klopp leaves or when Man United's gravy train with Ronaldo or a shirt deal falls by the wayside. Sadly, we are not Man United or Liverpool, and while our stadium is an immense source of pride, we are completely shit in the commercial department. 

 

At the end of the day, I hope new adboards, shirt sponsor, hell, even sponsors of stands, training ground, official airline, etc etc etc is done before selling off the naming rights. But they've got to explore every avenue for us to compete long term. 

[Wullie]

Just now, kisearch said:

 

Kind of how I feel about the 'what is a club in any case' SBR quote in relation to us. I still remember how much everyone on here lauded those words when his book came out and then especially when he died. How true what he was saying was and how it summed up what it means to support your club.  Fast forward to now and it feels as ridiculous as believing in Santa in your 30s. The fact he specifically talks about it not being the contracts, get-out clauses, marketing departments or executive boxes is just an extra kick in the nuts. Ashley completely ruined this fanbase's sense of proprietary like.

 

Yeah that's absolutely spot on, can't believe that quote didn't occur to me.

 

Jonathan Liew was on Second Captains last week, and he said something that really resonated with me:

 

The really cynical view that Mike Ashley had of football fans as this pliant consumer base, he's been totally vindicated. He's gone and the Newcastle fans, who you'd like to think were vaguely engaged with the idea of Newcastle United as this local community club with values and a morality, independent of winning games or signing players, that's all been exposed as a bit of a sham.

[Yorkie]

3 minutes ago, Wullie said:

The really cynical view that Mike Ashley had of football fans as this pliant consumer base, he's been totally vindicated. He's gone and the Newcastle fans, who you'd like to think were vaguely engaged with the idea of Newcastle United as this local community club with values and a morality, independent of winning games or signing players, that's all been exposed as a bit of a sham.

 

Except that's a fucking insult as it only refers to a certain amount of supporters, which is totally in keeping with the rest of the Guardian's lazy, sensationalist wank around what's happening. 

[mrmojorisin75]

Is this an official thing btw or just some papertalk bollocks?

[Guest neesy111]

Lads and lasses, the new owners will get around these rules like PSG and Man City did.  It's illegal as far i can see with the latest nonsense from the PL clubs.

[Guest HTT II]

2 minutes ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

Is this an official thing btw or just some papertalk bollocks?

Probably some soft early feelers put out by the club to gauge how it would go down…