BeloEmre Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Wonder if the tannoy at SJP at our next home match will say "welcome to Sports Direct Arena" then... Of course he will. If he don't want to lose his job... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 The worst thing we could do now is try and effect the performance on the pitch. We may not like the chance, but it would be plain stupid to try and spoil the good process we are seeing at the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Aye, because i suggested this was the entire reason he bought the club. Wonderful reasoning skills there. It's been quoted many, many times that this was the case. Educate one's self. I didnt personally suggest it did i, im not to bothered about what others have been quoted as thinking Eh? The reason he bought the club was to market his goods in the far east, using Newcastle as a marketing tool. SJH quoted as saying this when he sold his shares. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 We've been over this several times, but I don't see how he'd be marketing his goods in the Far East given that he doesn't even have shops here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Also, in SE Asia you can get knock off sporting goods for half the price absolutely everywhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 We've been over this several times, but I don't see how he'd be marketing his goods in the Far East given that he doesn't even have shops here. build brand awareness through advertising, start to do business once the profile is raised. it's not just in the far east that the premier league is popular anyway, although i'm sure everybody already knows this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Course not but what exactly can be done? He's the one that looks the prat in all this, not us. I'm not going to let one scroat of a man ruin my matchday experience. That's it, TBH - And there's only one thing that will be affected by any negative chanting and demonstrations towards him at the matches, and that is the team. It certainly wont affect him - history has shown this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Fans singing against Ashley will probably lead them to sell someone in Jan or not spend any money due to their twisted logic that Dekka went on about in the Ronny. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 You can sing and shout loudly against the renaming without upsetting the players performance on the pitch. It's about generating noise and having passion. The lads on the pitch won't give a fuck if 50,000 people are singing The Blaydon Races or Stand Up For St James' Park. It's booing, aiming abuse at players and also silence that will put the team off their game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 You can sing and shout loudly against the renaming without upsetting the players performance on the pitch. It's about generating noise and having passion. The lads on the pitch won't give a fuck if 50,000 people are singing The Blaydon Races or Stand Up For St James' Park. It's booing, aiming abuse at players and also silence that will put the team off their game. this, positive chanting is the way to go, whether that be about the team or the stadium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. His lack of due diligence which ultimately will lead to us being stuck with him unless someone of Man City's owners type wealth comes in to save the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. His lack of due diligence which ultimately will lead to us being stuck with him unless someone of Man City's owners type wealth comes in to save the day. His lack of due dilligence was a godsend, hate to think where we'd have been without it. However bad he's been. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 What a clueless c*** that brand expert is. Wonder whose pocket he's in. He mentions Arsenal getting £6 million a year from 2006 when the global economy was probably at its height and he claims that £10 million for us in the middle of a global recession is more than realistic and is an actual bargain. Villa's shirt sponsorship in 2006 was £5 million I believe with 32red, they signed one in the summer with Genting for £8 million. Arsenal's deal that they thought was good at the time isn't so great now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. His lack of due diligence which ultimately will lead to us being stuck with him unless someone of Man City's owners type wealth comes in to save the day. His lack of due dilligence was a godsend, hate to think where we'd have been without it. However bad he's been. So you have the power of being able to see hypothetical situations...you should publicise that, you'll make a bloody fortune. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistle17 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. His lack of due diligence which ultimately will lead to us being stuck with him unless someone of Man City's owners type wealth comes in to save the day. His lack of due dilligence was a godsend, hate to think where we'd have been without it. However bad he's been. I agree with what you're saying, and I too acknowledge what Ashley did- and financially has done for us- but we can't keep saying this after every insult, lie, and catastrophic decision thrown our way. You would think that four years on he would have adapted and learnt from mistakes. But as we continuously see, he simply doesn't. Literally every season he has been here uproar (mid-season, too) has been caused by something rash, needless or completely illogical. I'm very pleased to see where we are in the table and that what we have achieved so far is through prudent spending on players, but as .com have said....will whatever we receive- if we ever do find a sponsor- help us that much? I don't think so. Not one bit. Ashley should be working towards qualifying for Europe as that in itself would bring in good money. He simply cannot keep going the way he is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't understand the point of saying that "we should already be competing with everyone except the top 4". Should we? Why? The fact is we aren't, the finances speak for themselves. It also conveniently ignores the collection of clubs who are spending a lot less than us, and the like of Everton who are totally skint. And like Toon Pack says, imagine if Ashley had done proper due diligence and decided not to buy us. Fuck knows where we'd be then. None of this justifies the name change, but it's pointless to argue against it based on some magical assumption that our finances should be better than they are. Ashley's naivety didn't cause our financial problems, it just meant he made himself responsible for sorting them out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Mistle17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't understand the point of saying that "we should already be competing with everyone except the top 4". Should we? Why? The fact is we aren't, the finances speak for themselves. It also conveniently ignores the collection of clubs who are spending a lot less than us, and the like of Everton who are totally skint. And like Toon Pack says, imagine if Ashley had done proper due diligence and decided not to buy us. Fuck knows where we'd be then. None of this justifies the name change, but it's pointless to argue against it based on some magical assumption that our finances should be better than they are. Ashley's naivety didn't cause our financial problems, it just meant he made himself responsible for sorting them out. Which clubs are spending a lot less than us? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Secondly, they seem to be trying to sell the idea to an international market. They're trying to demonstrate how a sponsor's name will get a very high profile on international TV by the various advertising spots around the ground (presently occupied by Sports Direct), and by the naming of the stadium. Local fans choosing to keep calling it St James's Park might not put anyone off. The ambition is to get an international sponsor, not a local one or even a British one. Exactly. It's perfect for a company who's market is not aimed at people in the North East or even the UK, but want the exposure that the Premier League can offer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So there we have it. The ground name is being sold because the fans are demanding another striker. Is that finally an admission that no more of the Andy Carroll money is going to be spent on players and all £35m has already been reinvested in the club? Those agents fees really must be extortionate.... Let's assume that the £8-10m is an exaggeration and in reality selling this part of the club's heritage will bring in more like £5-7m. Is it worth it? That is not going to help us "compete with the big boys". At the moment clubs like Stoke City, Fulham and QPR are outspending us, while we plead poverty. That's despite 45K season ticket holders, a significant share of TV money, substantial merchandise income (including three new shirts per year) and the fees banked from other player sales - not just big Andy. Why are we not already competing with every team in the Premier League except Chelsea, the two Manchester clubs and possibly Arsenal? It can't be put down to massive player wages anymore, unless Alan Smith is still costing us £10m/year.... Like the Carroll transfer fee, a lot of us would accept the economics if we thought the money was going to be used purely for team strengthening but recent history suggests otherwise. It seems that over four years on, Ashley's lack of due diligence is still being paid for by everyone connected with the club, except those at fault. His lack of due diligence which ultimately will lead to us being stuck with him unless someone of Man City's owners type wealth comes in to save the day. His lack of due dilligence was a godsend, hate to think where we'd have been without it. However bad he's been. I agree with what you're saying, and I too acknowledge what Ashley did- and financially has done for us- but we can't keep saying this after every insult, lie, and catastrophic decision thrown our way. You would think that four years on he would have adapted and learnt from mistakes. But as we continuously see, he simply doesn't. Literally every season he has been here uproar (mid-season, too) has been caused by something rash, needless or completely illogical. I'm very pleased to see where we are in the table and that what we have achieved so far is through prudent spending on players, but as .com have said....will whatever we receive- if we ever do find a sponsor- help us that much? I don't think so. Not one bit. Ashley should be working towards qualifying for Europe as that in itself would bring in good money. He simply cannot keep going the way he is. On the other hand, most of the decisions he has made were incredibly unpopular at the time but actually turned out to not harm us that much or even leave the club in better shape. Pretty much the only exception to this is the gamble on staying up in the relegation season, and even that worked out OK in the end. I don't think the name change fits into this category, as I think some things are more important than finance, but I thought we had started to reassess some os Ashley's past decisions in a better light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't understand the point of saying that "we should already be competing with everyone except the top 4". Should we? Why? The fact is we aren't, the finances speak for themselves. It also conveniently ignores the collection of clubs who are spending a lot less than us, and the like of Everton who are totally skint. And like Toon Pack says, imagine if Ashley had done proper due diligence and decided not to buy us. Fuck knows where we'd be then. None of this justifies the name change, but it's pointless to argue against it based on some magical assumption that our finances should be better than they are. Ashley's naivety didn't cause our financial problems, it just meant he made himself responsible for sorting them out. Which clubs are spending a lot less than us? Only two I can think of are Norwich and Swansea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 You would think that four years on he would have adapted and learnt from mistakes. This is the crucial thing. I dont believe he thinks that he has ever made any mistakes. To him, these are all exceptional business decisions. They are only seen as mistakes in the eyes of the fans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Saw this on facebook DISCUSSION: Will Ed Miliband have your vote in the next election if he manages to get the name changed back to St James' Park? He has called on NUFC chiefs to think again on renaming stadium. You can contact him and urge him to pile political pressure of the FCB by visiting: http://twitter.com/ed_miliband If you will support him if he gets back the St James' Park name then use the hastag #NUFCbacksEd and message him @Ed_Miliband telling him so! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't understand the point of saying that "we should already be competing with everyone except the top 4". Should we? Why? The fact is we aren't, the finances speak for themselves. It also conveniently ignores the collection of clubs who are spending a lot less than us, and the like of Everton who are totally skint. And like Toon Pack says, imagine if Ashley had done proper due diligence and decided not to buy us. Fuck knows where we'd be then. None of this justifies the name change, but it's pointless to argue against it based on some magical assumption that our finances should be better than they are. Ashley's naivety didn't cause our financial problems, it just meant he made himself responsible for sorting them out. Which clubs are spending a lot less than us? I can't be bothered to look for exact numbers, but the point is that unless you have guaranteed regular European football must Premier League clubs are spending very modestly. Or if they are spending, they're being charged over the odds for average players and are increasing their levels of debt. I don't want to have the entire Ashley finance debate again from scratch, I just thought that we had started to come round to the way he was running things. I'm as angry about the name change as anyone BTW, I think it's a disgrace, I just don't think those NUFC.com arguments against it are the right ones. 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