Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I really want option 1 but I voted 2 as more realistic. With the caveat that nothing should go on the east stand and the font is changed. 
 

I don’t mind sponsorship around the place in general, just also want some iconic non-commercial stuff to adore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I feel like I could live with something going up under the big screen, or maybe even the Gallowgate fascia, but the East Stand has to be clean for me. There's plenty parts of the ground in good competition but it's that section which has been soiled the worst for me. Bring back the proper text and stick the four beautiful crests up there, in colour, alongside it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good effort but it's really quite nuanced as for me its about identity. Ashley bizarrely as a sports brand owner endeavoured to strip the club of any sense of sporting identity, or that of a regional hub to be proud of. Heritage? Fuck that - Sports Direct Arena. Achievement ? Fuck that - look at my share price. It's not really about what they are replaced with or quantity but the intent behind it. SJP's name was cast away without forethought. Wonga ffs. I mean in terms of morality there's still issues - but it's two sides of the same coin in terms of 'using' a football club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather there was no branding on the top of the stands etc, but thats probably not viable unless we want no sponsorship money. I wouldn't mind something on the East Stand as long as its more towards the corners so the shot from the tunnel only shows NEWCASTLE UNITED

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer not to have huge sponsorship signs plastered everywhere like SD was, but tbh money is going to talk. If a company is putting in big money, then we can't really expect the club to turn it down. And by big money, I'm not talking about the piss take stitch up we had under Ashley. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like stadium sponsorship generally especially old stadiums, but after 10-20years of it I'm desensitised to a degree

with us it was that it didn't benefit us in anyway and benefited a bloke deliberately hurting the club (what he made in sponsors is money the club was cost) - if SD sponsorship gave the club an advantage it would have been more tolerable, that it didn't and in fact was nothing but damaging to the club - was basically just defacing grafitti

 

 

Edited by Wolfcastle

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Thomson Mouse said:

I think the new owners seem to have a good understanding of what we’re about.

 

I’d be shocked if they replaced those with other signs, it’s an easy PR win for them

 

They did say they wanted to run the club as a business though, ultimately they are ploughing a lot of money into NUFC, stadium sponsorship would be too lucrative to pass up I'd have thought. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

They did say they wanted to run the club as a business though, ultimately they are ploughing a lot of money into NUFC, stadium sponsorship would be too lucrative to pass up I'd have thought. 

 

They don’t need it though really. Culturally they’ll be sensitive as we should to them

Link to post
Share on other sites

For question 2, i voted no. But, i want us to replace it with maybe somehing more modern looking. Perhaps backlight on Newcastle United with the club badge.

 

 

Edited by nufcjb

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thomson Mouse said:

 

So you should’ve voted yes then

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nufcjb said:

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

 

That'll have been my wording at fault, particularly the use of 'returned'. At the heart of the question was 'should we get rid of the SD font.' I think you can change it if you click 'show vote options' and vote again, if you're bothered. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SD font has to go. It's an easy win for them. Back to old or something better. They also need to pick several prime locations for their branding and scrap the rest just so its visually cut down (for us) but still has the same exposure for cameras (and sponsor)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nufcjb said:

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

 

Yeah I voted no for the same reason tbh.

 

It's not imperative it is changed, but if they asked me if I'd want it changed I'd say yes in a heartbeat.

 

Might just be the way the question was framed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, nufcjb said:

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Fair play, badly worded.

 

out of interest when did the old letters appear on the East Stand? Can’t remember

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...