St James' Park

[Pokerprince2004]

Had no idea it was called The Spotify Nou Camp! although I know Reading's ground is no longer the Majeski but now the Select Car leasing Stadium

[Kid Icarus]

13 minutes ago, Gawalls said:

If the money brought in for a name change wasn’t worth it then nobody would have changed their names ffs, the proof is in the pudding.

 

 They’re better business men than any of us and haven’t done evening to earn our distrust so as  far as I’m concerned then if they say we need to change the name to progress then that’s good enough for me.

 

 The same people that are saying “you better not change the name” are probably a lot of the same people saying “why didn’t you buy more players last window - moneys not an issue”. Can’t have it both ways

They're probably not like, you just want to use that argument 

 

Old Trafford, Villa Park, Anfield, Goodison, and plenty of others haven't changed names or took on sponsorship. Until an existing stadium takes up a name change and brings in the amounts being banded about in here, it's a pretty weak argument.

[Gawalls]

7 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Had no idea it was called The Spotify Nou Camp! although I know Reading's ground is no longer the Majeski but now the Select Car leasing Stadium

The fact you don’t know it was called this even though it was over 3 months ago when renamed speaks volumes. It will bring money in but the name change won’t really buy widely acknowledged.

[Gawalls]

9 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

They're probably not like, you just want to use that argument 

 

Old Trafford, Villa Park, Anfield, Goodison, and plenty of others haven't changed names or took on sponsorship. Until an existing stadium takes up a name change and brings in the amounts being banded about in here, it's a pretty weak argument.

Villa and Everton don’t compete at the level we’re aiming for and remain at our current level, the level we’re trying  to break out from where Liverpool and Man U sell massive amounts of franchise world wide compared to us.

 

a quick Google has just told me Liverpool are 4th and Man U 5th in world wide marchendise sales.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Gawalls

[Kanji]

Assume it’s being brought up because the interest in it is probably meaningful and the money for it is probably why they are are Considering. 

[Gawalls]

They should just open up a shopping centre or something and call it at James’s park then pay us for advertising ?

[Nun tumblers]

31 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Had no idea it was called The Spotify Nou Camp! although I know Reading's ground is no longer the Majeski but now the Select Car leasing Stadium

It still sounds better than the mackems, 

Uncle Bob Murray built them an oversized ground and renamed it after one of Europe's most iconic staduims Benficas SOL,it would be like us renaming sjp the Santiago Bernabeu.

[Kid Icarus]

10 minutes ago, Gawalls said:

Villa and Everton don’t compete at the level we’re aiming for and remain at our current level, the level we’re trying  to break out from where Liverpool and Man U sell massive amounts of franchise world wide compared to us.

 

a quick Google has just told me Liverpool are 4th and Man U 5th in world wide marchendise sales.

 

 

 

The levels we're aiming for doesn't change anything does it? The argument earlier was that it brings in money that makes it worth doing, so surely they'd have done it if it's worth doing? Everton have also spent £300m more than we have trying to break through the glass ceiling and are on the bones of their arse now, so you'd think they'd be doing it if it was worth doing, Likewise Villa.

 

Liverpool are pretty shrewd financially too. They wouldn't dare change the name of Anfield. 1 because unlike some of our lot, they have a sense of history and wouldn't allow it, and 2 the money it brings in wouldn't make it worth doing anyway. 

[Gawalls]

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

The levels we're aiming for doesn't change anything does it? The argument earlier was that it brings in money that makes it worth doing, so surely they'd have done it if it's worth doing? Everton have also spent £300m more than we have trying to break through the glass ceiling and are on the bones of their arse now, so you'd think they'd be doing it if it was worth doing, Likewise Villa.

 

Liverpool are pretty shrewd financially too. They wouldn't dare change the name of Anfield. 1 because unlike some of our lot, they have a sense of history and wouldn't allow it, and 2 the money it brings in wouldn't make it worth doing anyway. 

So when the new owners say we have to if we want to compete you believe their wrong and you’re right or they’re just simply lying?

 

if it wasn’t necessary they wouldn’t be considering it.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Gawalls

[Nun tumblers]

The so called big six don't want another giant club spoiling things for them,and will try anything to stifle us ( look what the arrogant cunts did when they tried to  fuck the league, where off to a closed shop) pif are  battling them aswell as ffp ,us supporters will get the benefits from a Aramaco SJP,just look what Eales did from a standing start at Atlanta utd ,we are moving onto the next level and you know what even though I'm locked out it's fooking Bbbrrrriiiuuuuuuullllllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnbnnnnnnnnnnnnnnntttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttrrrrrttttttttt fuck Klopp and the rest of them.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Nun tumblers

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Gawalls said:

So when the new owners say we have to if we want to compete you believe their wrong and you’re right or they’re just simply lying?

 

 

Show me where they've said we have to do it if we want to compete? Eales has talked about fan consultation, I'd be absolutely astounded if stadium sponsorship was a make or break issue for our success and even more astounded if that being the case they allowed fans to have any influence on the decision. 

[Stifler]

5 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

The levels we're aiming for doesn't change anything does it? The argument earlier was that it brings in money that makes it worth doing, so surely they'd have done it if it's worth doing? Everton have also spent £300m more than we have trying to break through the glass ceiling and are on the bones of their arse now, so you'd think they'd be doing it if it was worth doing, Likewise Villa.

 

Liverpool are pretty shrewd financially too. They wouldn't dare change the name of Anfield. 1 because unlike some of our lot, they have a sense of history and wouldn't allow it, and 2 the money it brings in wouldn't make it worth doing anyway. 

Liverpool won’t do it because they have had a boost initially to put them in a position where they don’t need too.

Guarantee it if they rebuilt Anfield like Spurs rebuilt their stadium, then they absolutely would be calling it the Liverpool Victoria Arena or something like that in order to pay for it.

The thing is though they are in a position where they already have a stadium of a decent size, and to increase their stadium all they need to do is take down a couple of their shit stands, stand by stand and rebuild them. They have the land to do that, and each stand would only cost the same as a new player for them. For us we don’t have the land and the majority of our stands are interconnected more. If we did it it’s a rebuild job, Gallowgate stand aside, which again ha it’s own problems.

[Stifler]

3 minutes ago, Nun tumblers said:

The so called big six don't want another giant club spoiling things for them,and will try anything to stifle us ( look what the arrogant cunts did when they tried  fuck the league, where off to a closed shop) pif are  battling them aswell as ffp ,us supporters will get the benefits from a Aramaco SJP,just look what Eales did from a standing start at Atlanta utd ,we are moving onto the next level and you know what even though I'm locked out it's fooking Bbbrrrriiiuuuuuuullllllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnbnnnnnnnnnnnnnnntttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttrrrrrttttttttt fuck Klopp and the rest of them.

 

 

 

I think it’s worth pouring out that Atlanta moved into a stadium that also holds their NFL team. Without them moving in there is not a chance Atlanta would have been given the funding for such a stadium and such a large stadium. They would without a doubt had been playing in a 20k seater relatively flat pack stadium.

[Gawalls]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Show me where they've said we have to do it if we want to compete? Eales has talked about fan consultation, I'd be absolutely astounded if stadium sponsorship was a make or break issue for our success and even more astounded if that being the case they allowed fans to have any influence on the decision. 

They have always said the fans would be consulted and I’ve never argued against that but they’ve acknowledged on more than one accasion that spending like we have in every window with our current setup isn’t going to work and we need to create more revenue streams. Shirt and stadium sponsors is always going to be top of that list I feel

 

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/23043954.newcastle-united-willing-sell-naming-rights-st-james-park/

[TheGuv]

https://www.themag.co.uk/2022/10/st-james-park-remain-not-rename-newcastle-united/#disqus_thread
 

My article on this. Glad to see the comments already haven’t taken on board the point I was making about other revenue streams.

[HaydnNUFC]

The Mag comment section is almost as atrocious as the Daily Fail's 

[Gawalls]

9 minutes ago, TheGuv said:

https://www.themag.co.uk/2022/10/st-james-park-remain-not-rename-newcastle-united/#disqus_thread
 

My article on this. Glad to see the comments already haven’t taken on board the point I was making about other revenue streams.

It’s a very nice article and in an ideal world great but imo its not achievable. You talk of 1999 financial achievements as if “let’s just do that again then” but back then there was no £400m Man City stadium sponsorships or 62,000 attendance grounds like their is now.

 

 The game has changed and at some point we’ll hit a ceiling in my opinion and if we don’t break through then what happens?

 

 Don’t get me wrong - I’d love to be wrong and totally understand people wanting to keep the name but for me, if they were to ever say “look trust us - changing the name would help us considerably” they’d get my backing.

[ohmelads]

I'm sure I read somewhere that Daz Eales was brought in for his left-field thinking? Yet in practically his first major interview he has jumped straight to the most obvious and most severe short term option of renaming the stadium. I find this worrying. At best I think he is lowballing us to get us talking about it before introducing something less unpalatable. It's also concerning that he keeps referencing his time at Atlanta, a club ("franchise"?) that is 8 years old, and was 0 years old when he got involved with it. No disrepect to anyone who follows them, and I get that's his most recent job on his CV, but what worked there is no justification for bulldozing key aspects of our club's identity and vast history. Atlanta were parachuted into the top and only division with no relegation and with large financial backing. The fact he is suggesting selling stadium rights means he wants to, otherwise why antagonise the fans by musing the idea in an interview?

 

Where do you draw the line of what a club actually is? We may all have different answers to that, but I think most consider the most basic elements of a football club's identity to be its its location, history, colours, name, and home ground. The fanbase has become infinitely more diverse, and I think most embrace that provided those core elements remain. I look at Spurs stadium and I see a toilet seat. I look at Arsenal's ground and I think of an airline. Highbury had history and character. Is that worth 20m a year or whatever we might get (possibly less)? Time may come where we have no choice, but I don't want that to be the first go-to option. Eales should be exploring alternatives first.

[PauloGeordio]

I’m sure Eales and the club are exploring ALL possibilities. I look forward to their proposals to take this diamond and polish it brightly 

[Groundhog63]

Unlike Liverpool fans I've got "no sense of history" apparently ???

 

This despite supporting Newcastle United since 1970.

 

Because I don't give a fuck they can call the ground wtf they like ?

 

 

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

2 hours ago, Gawalls said:

They have always said the fans would be consulted and I’ve never argued against that but they’ve acknowledged on more than one accasion that spending like we have in every window with our current setup isn’t going to work and we need to create more revenue streams. Shirt and stadium sponsors is always going to be top of that list I feel

 

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/23043954.newcastle-united-willing-sell-naming-rights-st-james-park/

If you're putting 2 and 2 together, fair enough, but there's nothing in that article that says we have to do it if we want to compete. 

[Gawalls]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

If you're putting 2 and 2 together, fair enough, but there's nothing in that article that says we have to do it if we want to compete. 

Agreed on that

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, Groundhog63 said:

Unlike Liverpool fans I've got "no sense of history" apparently ???

 

This despite supporting Newcastle United since 1970.

 

Because I don't give a fuck they can call the ground wtf they like ?

 

 

 

 

 

Well, aye, obviously 

[Kid Icarus]

2 hours ago, Stifler said:

Liverpool won’t do it because they have had a boost initially to put them in a position where they don’t need too.

Guarantee it if they rebuilt Anfield like Spurs rebuilt their stadium, then they absolutely would be calling it the Liverpool Victoria Arena or something like that in order to pay for it.

The thing is though they are in a position where they already have a stadium of a decent size, and to increase their stadium all they need to do is take down a couple of their shit stands, stand by stand and rebuild them. They have the land to do that, and each stand would only cost the same as a new player for them. For us we don’t have the land and the majority of our stands are interconnected more. If we did it it’s a rebuild job, Gallowgate stand aside, which again ha it’s own problems.

Exactly, they don't need to, that's precisely the point, it's not worth doing. 

[astraguy]

Seems the rubgy didn't go well